By 2011, I suspect that there will be more than enough that most ppl in the west will be within 200 miles of a center.
So everyone will wait until 2011 to buy one? This is the typical "cart before the horse" problem. They need sales to expand, and they need presence everywhere to have sales. I think the 2011 figure is very optimistic unless they really have huge sales in California. No one is lending money right now, nor will be soon.
Hell, I'd buy one to support the technology and because it is a nice looking car. But they don't/won't sell them in my country. I shudder to think when they will be available here (2030? I'll be dead).
Yeah but that usually happens inside "stars", "particle accelerators", and "nuclear reactors", not in the BIOSPHERE. Certainly we haven't discovered that "cold fusion plankton" whose existence you seem to be hinting at.
Of course you have to pay the shipping to cart it to California every TWELVE THOUSAND MILES to have it serviced by the only authorized Tesla mechanics in the world, unless of course you want to void your warranty. I wonder what being without your car for a month every year feels like. Surely the $3000 you pay for shipping is less than what you saved that year on gas, right? Another little detail is that the battery life is 100,000 miles. Umm, I would hate to think how much replacing the batteries costs. Providing Tesla doesn't follow the Apple pricing plan, they might cost less than a new car.
I guess it's fine if you live in LA, or within 200 miles of the dealership. Now we need more dealerships/repair centers asap if this is going to go anywhere...
there seems to be some ageism going on in the IT industry when it comes to older geeks.
There is age discrimination in EVERY industry, not just IT. Oh it may be "illegal", but age and skin color are things that are far more difficult to hide at interview time than marital status, sexual preference, religion, etc. Funny how all the older guys seem to be the ones sweeping the floor, or running the company. There's a hint there, if you're wise enough to see it. Welcome to the real world?
The original experiment was flawed to begin with. What end point did they expect? The dead plankton vanished out of existence once it reached the ocean bottom?
Now, instead of dead plankton sitting on the bottom (which eventually would be turned back to free CO2/bicarbonate dissolved in the ocean once bacteria had finished decomposing it), it's swimming around under the ocean surface as fish and other life forms that are a little less hungry than before. What's the difference? Oh, and those fish will eventually die and be consumed by saprophytic bacteria, too. And the carbon goes right back into the water.
Perhaps some people can see the bright side - in increasing the food supply for higher organisms, some shellfish will benefit and grow nice, healthy shells, and some quantity of CO2 will be "permanently" fixed into those shells that don't dissolve too well in sea water and are quite indigestible to boot. However I doubt very much that this represents a significant amount of carbon- certainly not worth the expense of dumping iron into the ocean at regular intervals. It takes a great deal of "CO2 producing fuels" to mine, refine, dissolve, transport and distribute all that iron.
I can't believe someone actually put up money to fund something like this. It puts American banks to shame. Don't they teach the "carbon cycle" and the concept of "conservation of matter" in high schools anymore? Even the limestone on the sea bottom will eventually get back into the atmosphere as it is subducted and the CO2 produced when it breaks down in the magma is eventually blown back into the atmosphere by vulcanism. However we humans are little concerned with geological time. MATTER CANNOT BE CREATED OR DESTROYED. I would have expected something better from Stanford... but then again, maybe not. Glad I got my doctorate elsewhere.
Oh, and to all the CO2 from fossil fuels is producing global warming preachers - where do you think those fossil fuels came from in the first place? It magically appeared underground, or "God" put it there? THE NET AMOUNT OF CARBON ON PLANET EARTH IS FIXED. The CO2 that is currently underground as oil was once in the atmosphere. Logically there is LESS CO2 in the air and oceans today than X million years ago - when petroleum didn't exist. Since the Earth has obviously managed to support many forms of life during that time, I wouldn't bank on the end of the world just yet, even if we nasty humans manage to "liberate" all the CO2 available. But some people just can't use their heads. Maybe they should go to Stanford.
To defeat this system, all I need to do is to "share" my email account with other folks, or just setup an account just for game purposes. What about that?
If it's anything like Steam, you need to get online to authenticate. Once they receive a statistically unreasonable amount of authentications for email "x", it's very simple to refuse further authentications citing that email address. If someone "stole" your email address this puts you in the position of losing access to ALL your games that use this system, especially if those games phone home to validate every time you launch them.
Now I am not saying this is a good system, and it does trample all over the right of first sale as well as provides a neat/subtle way of spying on which IP's I use and tying them to an email. But it could be effective IF it can't be hacked. But since we know EVERYTHING can be hacked, it's yet another waste of time and money. I wonder when the publishers will realize that they aren't actually losing trillions of dollars per product, and in fact the money thrown at DRM and other scams is probably the same or more than what they REALLY "lose" through piracy.
To turn around to countries that have been using cars for years in a major way and say "well give up your car" - rememebr those countries' lifestyles have been based around cars for many years...in the US since the 40's-50's (really before then, but that was an insane boom time). The AVERAGE american commute is 30 minutes by car - not feasible by foot/bike...and 30 minutes by car usually means about 1-1.5 hours by train/bus each direction. Again, it's living standard. If you never had it you didn't build your life around it.
I agree that no one will willingly give up their lifestyle (which is characterized by unparalleled per capita WASTEFULNESS) in America and Europe. The key word here is WILLINGLY. However you need to realize that people in less developed countries will not willingly give up their right to strive for a better standard of living.
Your argument is basically "we already have it, so you can't" is a non sequitur. Of course it's easy to argue for the position that favors yourself - you've grown comfortable in that position. I'm taking the other side of the argument - first it's not your decision to make - the last barrel of oil will go to the highest bidder. Supply and demand determine this, not pseudo-morality. Second - if you try to enforce a double standard on developing nations (it's ok for us but not for you), be prepared for a fight to the death - since after all a prohibition will be considered "death" by the developing nation anyway, therefore they have nothing to lose.
Humans will only understand that the oil is gone after the oil is gone. We're not good at forward thinking on a collective basis - if you want examples just look at the US government.
But, enabling 29,000,000,000 people to buy a car and drive around is not always a great idea.
So when Henry Ford rolled out the Model T for under $800 or so, with the intention of selling it to the masses, he was "enabling" the destruction of the environment, etc? After all, before Ford came along, cars were an item only affordable by the 1% richest part of the population.
So how come Americans can get mass produced cars for "the common man" (with all the environmental destruction involved) and Indians cannot? Suddenly it's a bad idea if Indians and Chinese wish to progress...
Fundamentally I understand your point - if everyone has a straw sucking up the oil fields, then they will dry up much faster. But I say that you cannot stop the rest of the world from trying to progress - either physically or morally. After all, America showed the world that a life of materialism and luxury is desirable since most of your middle class has (until recently) attained it, and Hollywood keeps exporting and advertising it. Then you want to tell the world - "no, this is for US, it's not for YOU". A word of advice: watch your back.
However if we don't find a viable, portable and economically feasible source of energy soon, there's going to be one hell of a fight for the last few billion barrels of oil - and I'm not even sure the US would win.
PhD is not equal to "job". No one will hire these clowns, except other clowns. And since everyone hates clowns, grouping them all together is win-win, especially if they all move to Texas.
We are aware of Travis' illness and have given permission for him to travel
In England, schools have to give permission for their students to travel? WTF? If they consider themselves legal guardians, perhaps they'd like to take a share of all the other responsibilities of parenting, too?
Seriously, they propose that movies about drugs, murder, sex, and other illegal things go to fund drugs, murder, sex, and other illegal things? I'll just wear these earplugs while the universe pops out of existence.
Slashdot Mirror
By 2011, I suspect that there will be more than enough that most ppl in the west will be within 200 miles of a center.
So everyone will wait until 2011 to buy one? This is the typical "cart before the horse" problem. They need sales to expand, and they need presence everywhere to have sales. I think the 2011 figure is very optimistic unless they really have huge sales in California. No one is lending money right now, nor will be soon.
Hell, I'd buy one to support the technology and because it is a nice looking car. But they don't/won't sell them in my country. I shudder to think when they will be available here (2030? I'll be dead).
Yeah but that usually happens inside "stars", "particle accelerators", and "nuclear reactors", not in the BIOSPHERE. Certainly we haven't discovered that "cold fusion plankton" whose existence you seem to be hinting at.
Of course you have to pay the shipping to cart it to California every TWELVE THOUSAND MILES to have it serviced by the only authorized Tesla mechanics in the world, unless of course you want to void your warranty. I wonder what being without your car for a month every year feels like. Surely the $3000 you pay for shipping is less than what you saved that year on gas, right? Another little detail is that the battery life is 100,000 miles. Umm, I would hate to think how much replacing the batteries costs. Providing Tesla doesn't follow the Apple pricing plan, they might cost less than a new car.
I guess it's fine if you live in LA, or within 200 miles of the dealership. Now we need more dealerships/repair centers asap if this is going to go anywhere...
there seems to be some ageism going on in the IT industry when it comes to older geeks.
There is age discrimination in EVERY industry, not just IT. Oh it may be "illegal", but age and skin color are things that are far more difficult to hide at interview time than marital status, sexual preference, religion, etc. Funny how all the older guys seem to be the ones sweeping the floor, or running the company. There's a hint there, if you're wise enough to see it. Welcome to the real world?
The original experiment was flawed to begin with. What end point did they expect? The dead plankton vanished out of existence once it reached the ocean bottom?
Now, instead of dead plankton sitting on the bottom (which eventually would be turned back to free CO2/bicarbonate dissolved in the ocean once bacteria had finished decomposing it), it's swimming around under the ocean surface as fish and other life forms that are a little less hungry than before. What's the difference? Oh, and those fish will eventually die and be consumed by saprophytic bacteria, too. And the carbon goes right back into the water.
Perhaps some people can see the bright side - in increasing the food supply for higher organisms, some shellfish will benefit and grow nice, healthy shells, and some quantity of CO2 will be "permanently" fixed into those shells that don't dissolve too well in sea water and are quite indigestible to boot. However I doubt very much that this represents a significant amount of carbon- certainly not worth the expense of dumping iron into the ocean at regular intervals. It takes a great deal of "CO2 producing fuels" to mine, refine, dissolve, transport and distribute all that iron.
I can't believe someone actually put up money to fund something like this. It puts American banks to shame. Don't they teach the "carbon cycle" and the concept of "conservation of matter" in high schools anymore? Even the limestone on the sea bottom will eventually get back into the atmosphere as it is subducted and the CO2 produced when it breaks down in the magma is eventually blown back into the atmosphere by vulcanism. However we humans are little concerned with geological time. MATTER CANNOT BE CREATED OR DESTROYED. I would have expected something better from Stanford... but then again, maybe not. Glad I got my doctorate elsewhere.
Oh, and to all the CO2 from fossil fuels is producing global warming preachers - where do you think those fossil fuels came from in the first place? It magically appeared underground, or "God" put it there? THE NET AMOUNT OF CARBON ON PLANET EARTH IS FIXED. The CO2 that is currently underground as oil was once in the atmosphere. Logically there is LESS CO2 in the air and oceans today than X million years ago - when petroleum didn't exist. Since the Earth has obviously managed to support many forms of life during that time, I wouldn't bank on the end of the world just yet, even if we nasty humans manage to "liberate" all the CO2 available. But some people just can't use their heads. Maybe they should go to Stanford.
To defeat this system, all I need to do is to "share" my email account with other folks, or just setup an account just for game purposes. What about that?
If it's anything like Steam, you need to get online to authenticate. Once they receive a statistically unreasonable amount of authentications for email "x", it's very simple to refuse further authentications citing that email address. If someone "stole" your email address this puts you in the position of losing access to ALL your games that use this system, especially if those games phone home to validate every time you launch them.
Now I am not saying this is a good system, and it does trample all over the right of first sale as well as provides a neat/subtle way of spying on which IP's I use and tying them to an email. But it could be effective IF it can't be hacked. But since we know EVERYTHING can be hacked, it's yet another waste of time and money. I wonder when the publishers will realize that they aren't actually losing trillions of dollars per product, and in fact the money thrown at DRM and other scams is probably the same or more than what they REALLY "lose" through piracy.
even security thorough obscurity.
The Romulans have a cloaking device too, you insensitive clod!
It's official - we're screwed.
Happy news for most of the nerds on this site who sigh and collectively whisper "Finally!"
To turn around to countries that have been using cars for years in a major way and say "well give up your car" - rememebr those countries' lifestyles have been based around cars for many years...in the US since the 40's-50's (really before then, but that was an insane boom time). The AVERAGE american commute is 30 minutes by car - not feasible by foot/bike...and 30 minutes by car usually means about 1-1.5 hours by train/bus each direction. Again, it's living standard. If you never had it you didn't build your life around it.
I agree that no one will willingly give up their lifestyle (which is characterized by unparalleled per capita WASTEFULNESS) in America and Europe. The key word here is WILLINGLY. However you need to realize that people in less developed countries will not willingly give up their right to strive for a better standard of living.
Your argument is basically "we already have it, so you can't" is a non sequitur. Of course it's easy to argue for the position that favors yourself - you've grown comfortable in that position. I'm taking the other side of the argument - first it's not your decision to make - the last barrel of oil will go to the highest bidder. Supply and demand determine this, not pseudo-morality. Second - if you try to enforce a double standard on developing nations (it's ok for us but not for you), be prepared for a fight to the death - since after all a prohibition will be considered "death" by the developing nation anyway, therefore they have nothing to lose.
Humans will only understand that the oil is gone after the oil is gone. We're not good at forward thinking on a collective basis - if you want examples just look at the US government.
But, enabling 29,000,000,000 people to buy a car and drive around is not always a great idea.
So when Henry Ford rolled out the Model T for under $800 or so, with the intention of selling it to the masses, he was "enabling" the destruction of the environment, etc? After all, before Ford came along, cars were an item only affordable by the 1% richest part of the population.
So how come Americans can get mass produced cars for "the common man" (with all the environmental destruction involved) and Indians cannot? Suddenly it's a bad idea if Indians and Chinese wish to progress...
Fundamentally I understand your point - if everyone has a straw sucking up the oil fields, then they will dry up much faster. But I say that you cannot stop the rest of the world from trying to progress - either physically or morally. After all, America showed the world that a life of materialism and luxury is desirable since most of your middle class has (until recently) attained it, and Hollywood keeps exporting and advertising it. Then you want to tell the world - "no, this is for US, it's not for YOU". A word of advice: watch your back.
However if we don't find a viable, portable and economically feasible source of energy soon, there's going to be one hell of a fight for the last few billion barrels of oil - and I'm not even sure the US would win.
I tried playing your game but couldn't find it.
And honestly, is it really a good idea to enable more people to buy cars?
No, it's not. So please hand over your car keys.
(My point being - who the hell are you to decide who gets to drive and who doesn't?)
PhD is not equal to "job". No one will hire these clowns, except other clowns. And since everyone hates clowns, grouping them all together is win-win, especially if they all move to Texas.
Many married men would consider this to be a feature, not a bug.
God, I am so sorry.
I applaud how you move effortlessly from one fiction to the next...
My 40+ year old brain is much more efficient than you young'uns because if only I could remember...
We are aware of Travis' illness and have given permission for him to travel
In England, schools have to give permission for their students to travel? WTF? If they consider themselves legal guardians, perhaps they'd like to take a share of all the other responsibilities of parenting, too?
generally, every life form slots in somewhere in the ecosystem "in balance"
I suggest you review the definition of "parasite".
to determine if a deception indicator can be found.
The only lie is the headline.
the 31-year-old alpha male
Not anymore - according to TFA he was castrated last year...
*nix will always still be a step behind Windows in gaming.
However considering that the age of your average PC gamer is well into his 30's, most of us are patient enough to wait.
touche (too lazy to put an accent on the e), and quite witty. (clap clap clap).
Welcome to the internet?
Seriously, they propose that movies about drugs, murder, sex, and other illegal things go to fund drugs, murder, sex, and other illegal things? I'll just wear these earplugs while the universe pops out of existence.
they could fund terrorism. Or alcoholism, or about anything else.
Even politicians? I know, I know - I'm going to far. Surely no one could be THAT terrible.