If you are a heavy user, this model can make sense, but if you are the occasional user, then they need to have some other approach like a per-use or per-hour fee.
Unfortunately, views from clickbait sites are just as valuable as views from quality sites. So, not only do we have ads that are annoying, we are constantly being baited to view content that is stupid.
Have quality, non-annoying, fast loading ads, relevant to the content, placed on quality content/sites, and I will be much more likely to not block them, and in some cases I may actually look at them.
Bingo. While I understand the agenda they have, a push for favorable business conditions just like any other business would pursue, why does Tesla not think they can compete on equal terms as the competition? Sounds like they feel they need help being competitive.
Cold war era waste is in all kinds of difficult to manage forms. A system of tight regulation & oversight, including fines for violations, is the best way to deal with it. If there are no fines or violations occurring, then either oversight or regulation is too lax, or both.
You assume they will be unfair. Most companies keep their cost profile confidential, utilities are not different, but in many cases public utilities disclose their costs much more than non-regulated ones. And, I did make the mistake of just saying cost, when part of the equation is 'value'. Companies charge more for things of higher value even if they are of lower cost. The value of a reliable connection, and in some cases the ability to force the sale of your own power is very real. What's it worth? I think you'd get a wide range of answers on that, and it would be hard to nail down exactly.
Attempts to pass state level regulation are usually the best way to define utility fear.
Fear, or adjustment? Prove its the former, you can't. You can make up your own definition of fear, challenges to equate to fear if you are a businessman.
Why does adjusting the reimbursement structure to match a changing market indicate fear?
There is plenty of evidence that the market is changing and that residential renewables are a factor. But that is not evidence of "fear". Are there challenges? Of course. The term "fear" is used for the sole purpose of feeding a certain set of extreme greens exactly what they want to hear.
So, the power lines & maintenance cost zero? what world are you living in? The distribution monitoring and switching don't have a cost? The billing systems don't have any cost? How about the cost of constantly adjusting their other source to accommodate their forced acceptance of your power?
They already have plenty of power, so in their minds there is a significant cost to taking yours.
You can take your tomatoes to the local grocery store to sell them for you, but would you be mad if they didn't want them?
^ahh, you fell for it, hook line and sinker. The 'cost of connection' thrown out there and you just assumed that covers infrastructure costs as a whole. You need to be a little more critical of this stuff, as infrastructure costs have always almost entirely come from the per kwh rate, and connection fees are really insignificant convenience fees. In fact, most regulators required connection fees to be as low as possible so the lower income people could afford them.
People should realize that markets adjust to new conditions in many ways. In this case, utilities have always embedded infrastructure costs in the per kwh rate. Now that the market is changing, it makes sense to separate those costs. It should be viewed as a good thing, because in the end it allows people to be charged properly for what they are getting, and make their own decisions accordingly.
You missed my point completely. The logic that they are "scared' simply because they are charging for the connection is not backed up by anything. Yes, solar has impacts that change the market. Many things change many markets, it is not evidence of fear. That conclusion is simply reached by those who feel good at the thought of scared, evil utilities.
I am sure the electric company is confident that you will not do that, or that most will not. If they were, they wouldn't charge for the connection fee.
WHY would electric companies FEAR batteries that enable a mass fleet of electric cars to be deployed? Its a huge market opportunity for them.
This electric company 'fear" story is just spinning to those greens' emotions. Don't you love the smell of fear in those awful, evil power utilities?
You have it backwards. They are not scared to charge for a connection because they know there is value in it to the customer. If they were scared of batteries, they would not be adding a charge that makes it more compelling to move to batteries completely.
If there is no value in having the connection, then people can disconnect.
If there is no value in having that connection, then get rid of it. If there is value in having that connection, then pay for it. Its quite simple. If the power company is charging to much, just disconnect.
You have to understand, this whole thing is based on statements made from self promoting Levins from the RMI, who is well know for telling the 'green' crowd exactly what they want to hear. It works, its already getting played, the followers are all over it. He's a genius!
^that, what you just said, has nothing to do with the base point. Drifting to some obscure point of morality, I really don't care.
The study you referenced clearly spends little effort on the racial aspects. You'll never convince me that a thorough look was done based on the content of what you linked.
Yup, stagger those updates so the ISPs don't have a big peak. ITS NOT FAIR! How do they choose who must wait UP TO TWO WEEKS? Probably start with the list of those that signed Obama's petition.
Sorry, but the study you refer to is not testing any hypothesis of racial differences in intelligence. In fact, racial lines are only briefly mentioned.
Slashdot Mirror
If you are a heavy user, this model can make sense, but if you are the occasional user, then they need to have some other approach like a per-use or per-hour fee.
Unfortunately, views from clickbait sites are just as valuable as views from quality sites. So, not only do we have ads that are annoying, we are constantly being baited to view content that is stupid.
Have quality, non-annoying, fast loading ads, relevant to the content, placed on quality content/sites, and I will be much more likely to not block them, and in some cases I may actually look at them.
Bingo. While I understand the agenda they have, a push for favorable business conditions just like any other business would pursue, why does Tesla not think they can compete on equal terms as the competition? Sounds like they feel they need help being competitive.
Cold war era waste is in all kinds of difficult to manage forms. A system of tight regulation & oversight, including fines for violations, is the best way to deal with it. If there are no fines or violations occurring, then either oversight or regulation is too lax, or both.
Because there is a right well to tell fictional stories?
If your express something using cultural references nobody has ever used before, maybe you're doing it wrong.
Amazing how few get it. Thankfully there are some like you that see it objectively.
You mean that imaginative product that doesn't exist... scary.
You assume they will be unfair. Most companies keep their cost profile confidential, utilities are not different, but in many cases public utilities disclose their costs much more than non-regulated ones. And, I did make the mistake of just saying cost, when part of the equation is 'value'. Companies charge more for things of higher value even if they are of lower cost. The value of a reliable connection, and in some cases the ability to force the sale of your own power is very real. What's it worth? I think you'd get a wide range of answers on that, and it would be hard to nail down exactly.
Attempts to pass state level regulation are usually the best way to define utility fear.
Fear, or adjustment? Prove its the former, you can't. You can make up your own definition of fear, challenges to equate to fear if you are a businessman.
Why does adjusting the reimbursement structure to match a changing market indicate fear?
There is plenty of evidence that the market is changing and that residential renewables are a factor. But that is not evidence of "fear". Are there challenges? Of course. The term "fear" is used for the sole purpose of feeding a certain set of extreme greens exactly what they want to hear.
So, the power lines & maintenance cost zero? what world are you living in? The distribution monitoring and switching don't have a cost? The billing systems don't have any cost? How about the cost of constantly adjusting their other source to accommodate their forced acceptance of your power?
They already have plenty of power, so in their minds there is a significant cost to taking yours.
You can take your tomatoes to the local grocery store to sell them for you, but would you be mad if they didn't want them?
^ahh, you fell for it, hook line and sinker. The 'cost of connection' thrown out there and you just assumed that covers infrastructure costs as a whole. You need to be a little more critical of this stuff, as infrastructure costs have always almost entirely come from the per kwh rate, and connection fees are really insignificant convenience fees. In fact, most regulators required connection fees to be as low as possible so the lower income people could afford them.
People should realize that markets adjust to new conditions in many ways. In this case, utilities have always embedded infrastructure costs in the per kwh rate. Now that the market is changing, it makes sense to separate those costs. It should be viewed as a good thing, because in the end it allows people to be charged properly for what they are getting, and make their own decisions accordingly.
You missed my point completely. The logic that they are "scared' simply because they are charging for the connection is not backed up by anything. Yes, solar has impacts that change the market. Many things change many markets, it is not evidence of fear. That conclusion is simply reached by those who feel good at the thought of scared, evil utilities.
I am sure the electric company is confident that you will not do that, or that most will not. If they were, they wouldn't charge for the connection fee.
WHY would electric companies FEAR batteries that enable a mass fleet of electric cars to be deployed? Its a huge market opportunity for them.
This electric company 'fear" story is just spinning to those greens' emotions. Don't you love the smell of fear in those awful, evil power utilities?
You have it backwards. They are not scared to charge for a connection because they know there is value in it to the customer. If they were scared of batteries, they would not be adding a charge that makes it more compelling to move to batteries completely.
If there is no value in having the connection, then people can disconnect.
If there is no value in having that connection, then get rid of it. If there is value in having that connection, then pay for it. Its quite simple. If the power company is charging to much, just disconnect.
You have to understand, this whole thing is based on statements made from self promoting Levins from the RMI, who is well know for telling the 'green' crowd exactly what they want to hear. It works, its already getting played, the followers are all over it. He's a genius!
So, every time they try to charge for something, it means they are scared? Or is it just in these circumstances?
So, what evidence is there that electric companies are scared? Sounds like just the contention of a greeny.
^that, what you just said, has nothing to do with the base point. Drifting to some obscure point of morality, I really don't care.
The study you referenced clearly spends little effort on the racial aspects. You'll never convince me that a thorough look was done based on the content of what you linked.
Ruled out quite conveniently.
Do you know for sure that all OS devices are updated at the same time or within 2 weeks?
Yup, stagger those updates so the ISPs don't have a big peak. ITS NOT FAIR! How do they choose who must wait UP TO TWO WEEKS? Probably start with the list of those that signed Obama's petition.
I demand action.
Sorry, but the study you refer to is not testing any hypothesis of racial differences in intelligence. In fact, racial lines are only briefly mentioned.