You prohibit drones flying in air corridors (is that what they're called?) and you strictly enforce it with hefty fines or jail time. What's the difference between someone catapulting a rock into a 737 vs. a drone?
I think, perhaps, I didn't articulate what I meant properly
What I'm saying is that if your company treats you right, is courteous, professional, and considerate, you will in all likelihood repay that favor when it comes to you leaving. If your company mistreats you, then you are more likely to exhibit the same attitude when you leave. If everyone just considerate of each other, you wouldn't have this situation - but we all know that's not the case.
In other words, "do unto others as you would have them do unto you". I'm not religious but this whole story is just the 'Golden Rule' applying itself.
I'm up in Canada so 'at will' doesn't apply but I have personally the cold-hearted way companies treat hard working employees, and it's brutal. I imagine for people in demand, it's not even the fact they want to avoid 'tough discussions' - it's just that there's no "relationship" with a corporation. I bet the vast majority of people who leave will miss their colleagues and the people, but no-one is missing the "corporation".
Incidentally, I've seen what happens when you try to have that 'tough discussion'. The company may offer you a pay increase to stay, but you will be forever be labelled as "that guy who just wanted more money" despite the fact that a company exists only to make it's shareholders or owners money....
If your company is going to lay you off, it's not like they give you a whole lot of notice in most cases. You turn up for work, bright and eyed and bushy tailed, only to find a Manager and HR type waiting to give you some really bad news
Sure, most places have severance, but it's not like they take your feelings into consideration so if employees are just up and leaving, that's behavior the corporation does all the time
I remember the first time I enabled OpenGL mode and was blown away by the visuals. I spent more time just walking around looking at stuff than playing in those first few hours
"Further, when I have no narrative for what causes SSD failures, it feels like every SSD is an unpredictable time bomb. Are they healthy or are they going to die tomorrow? "
Emphasis mine. I feel like this guy has opportunities to improve his coping mechanism. For someone in Computer Sciences, it seems like he's way too worried about this. I'm not trying to be mean, but it's like if I got into a car accident and then questioned the entire safety design of all vehicles rather than just taking a few steps back and understanding it's a freak event, but not a totally unexpected one. If you've been driving for 30 years, statistically, you're likely to get into at least one accident, even if it's not your fault
I mean, manufacturing defects, environment, and just old plain bad luck? SSDs have come a long way, but if I have anything of importance, I'm RAID'ing it and backing up. I feel anyone with an understanding of technology knows the importance of this.
Honest question, I don't mean actual infrastructure as in power station, power lines, transformers etc, though those are obviously critical but what are EV manufacturers doing on top of just creating EV's?
Tesla has their supercharger network but I don't see any equivalent from Chevrolet, Ford, Mercedes, Jaguar, BMW etc. If I buy an EV from anyone other than Tesla, the *only* places I can charge is:
- At home. Assuming I have the ability to hook up a Level 2 or 3 charger. Let's be honest, a Level 1 charger won't do anything for you when you have an EV (not a Hybrid)
- At some public place (e.g. Mall, shopping center, Starbucks etc.)
- At work. Assuming your workplace has charging stations
At least with a Tesla, you have those options AND superchargers. I feel EV manufacturers should be forced to contribute to charging capabilities if they're gonna be churning out vehicles.
No, I really , genuinely want a 560SEC. I love the shape and design. But I don't want the mechanical headache of a 20+ year old car, even if it was made in the era of over-engineered Mercedes.
The poster below you suggested a Miata but I can't imagine anyone in the market for a 560SEC thinking a Miata hits all the same critera. I mean, they're both cars, but that's probably as much as they have in common.
I wouldn't have replaced ALL the shingles on my roof, only on the portion that wasn't covered by panels. I mean, the shingles under the panels are in great condition, so why bother? Plus, I'd have the added headache of having someone remove the panels and then re-install them.
I'm being serious. I had solar panels installed on half my roof a few years ago. They completely cover the shingles and when it rains, barely any rain/water ends up on the shingles. It just sheets away on the panel itself. Same for snow.
I bet, in 30 years time when the shingles on the other side have to be replaced, the ones under the panels will be pristine. There's still a 2" gap between the shingle and panel so airflow can evaporate any moisture but the elements aren't beating down on them.
The cost of replacing shingles should probably be factored into the overall cost of the panels - which are coming down in price year over year.
"Oh look, the Sistine Chapel has a bunch of cracks and the paint is so faded that you can barely make out the art. Let me call in the folks who painted it ( ok, that will be difficult, but bear with me ) and ask them to fix all the things wrong with it so it can be enjoyed for another 50 years"
I don't think anyone buys an MG for the great handling:)
but if you've bought an MG and can improve the performance and reliability, it doesn't detract from the main reason you bought an MG. Which I'm assuming is you like the shape, the interior, and the size
If I could buy an 80's Mercedes 560SEC but replace the engine and transmission with an electric drive train, I would be a very happy person.
The number of cars that can be considered 'investments' is extremely small. Unless you have something like a Ferrari F40 or other super-niche super car, you've bought it to enjoy it, not to make money off it. The majority of super/hyper car owners buy them to actually drive them - I've joined a few owners forums and there are plenty of folks who drive their $1M+ vehicles practically daily.
If you have an old Aston Martin but find it difficult to drive because you know after an hour or so, it's gonna need a lot of TLC, switching to an electric drive train makes perfect sense.
I have a BMW 650 that is my summer car. However, like most BMW's, it suffers from the occasional oil leak, random blips during idle, and the ever looming threat of the SMG gearbox eating itself. Switching to an electric drive system would be perfect. I still get to enjoy driving it but don't have to worry about all the mechanical problems associated with an ICE..
Bah, that's nothing. I got a manual car where 1st gear doesn't work. And if you put it in first gear, it's a PITA trying to get it out. You have to disable the linkage and then not do that again
Even if a thief broke into my car, managed to hot wire it and got it started, what's the first thing they're gonna do? That's right, put it in first gear (I back into my parking spot) and then BAM!! they're done!
Engineer here. I feel like this argument is going nowhere but I'll try nonetheless to give a different perspective
Your cars brakes fail and you crash into a tree. If the following happened, the system is working as designed:
- Assuming total failure of the hydraulic braking system, you have a handbrake. In an emergency, you can use that to reduce your speed, but you lose some directional stability
- You can downshift gears to reduce speed. Directional stability remains unaffected but the rate of speed isn't reduced significantly
- You can throw the car into reverse or park. Some cars might not even let you do this, older ones will. You'll likely destroy major mechanical components but you'll also slow down pretty quick
- You crash into the tree. Your airbag, crumple zones etc. work in tandem to protect you. Car is likely a write off but hopefully your speed wasn't so high that you can still survive
In this context, individual components may have failed, but the system as a whole is working as designed. It's not even semantics, it's being able to step back and look at the system as a whole rather than focusing on individual components. A car is a system that consists of hundreds of components working together. If the fin component failed but other systems kicked in to account for that failure, then the system is indeed working as designed. Others have mentioned this numerous times, it just makes sense..
Brake engineers don't design their system in a vacuum, they do what they can to ensure brakes don't fail but they'll work with their drivetrain, safety, structural etc. peers to account for the possibility that their system may have a catastrophic failure and then need the other engineers to account for it.
We used comfree ($1,000 CAD) when selling our last home and it was fantastic. You get to post on their website and on MLS/Relator. We were very nervous about it initially but once we started getting a few interested people, we realized it was so easy. You still use a lawyer for the paperwork, and a good property lawyer will make sure you're covered but in reality, the vast majority of people aren't out to screw each other with a home purchase. And those that are are pretty easy to spot.
Negotiations were pretty straight forward. The buyers used a realtor and we went back and forth a few times before settling on a price. In fact, I think the actual negotiations took less than 30 mins. The most annoying thing about the whole transaction was random realtors coming to the house when they saw the comfree sign on the lawn trying to get us to sign with them because "they can sell the house much quicker".
Yup, at least in Canada, inspectors make you sign a waiver that essentially absolves the inspector of any and all responsibility of ANY problems found with the house. In fact, inspectors aren't even allowed (supposed?) to move anything so they can take a closer look. So, if you have a huge crack in the basement foundation, all you need to do is put a wardrobe in front of it and as far as the inspector is concerned, there's no crack.
If you think about it, there's no way an inspector can give you an accurate assessment of a house's structural quality or other problems in 2 hours.
The idea behind appraisals is fine. An independent valuation of the property to ensure the bank is going to be left holding onto a property that it can't make it's money back on should the owner default on the mortgage
In reality, I don't think it actually works that way. When we bought our house a few years back, we went to our regular bank and as part of the mortgage process, they used their appraiser. House was selling for 850k, got appraised for 730k. Bank said we'd need to pony up an additional 120k to make up the difference.
This didn't smell right because other comparable houses in the neighborhood was selling around the same price, certainly nothing was close to 700k. In fact ours had more open land and was a few hundred sq ft larger than others. To get a second opinion, we went to a mortgage broker who shopped around a few banks. Two appraisers went out and valued it at 850k and 900k respectively.
We ended up going with one of the other banks but the fact there was such a wide variance in appraisals (730k to 900k) tells me this is a purely subjective exercise. There's probably little to no actual objectivity around this, other than a few check boxes the appraiser marks off.
If you really want to fix the problem, you'd implement an truly objective system that would take into account things like:
- Square footage
- Proximity to highways, shopping etc
- Acerage
- Accessibility to local schools (maybe even ranked schools)
- Traffic flow
- Number of beds, baths etc
And so on. Then, you can remove the human element from it all.
Their backorder tells a different story. I would venture the 'market' for long-range EV's is huge but the people who can afford a $50K+ car is smaller than those who can afford up to $30K.
They won't run out of people to sell cars to. Lamborghini has a minuscule market and they don't have a problem selling cars.
Slashdot Mirror
It could have been a bird, but the lack of blood and guts on an otherwise pristine white paint job reduces it's likelihood quite a lot.
Or.... and I'm just throwing this out there...
You prohibit drones flying in air corridors (is that what they're called?) and you strictly enforce it with hefty fines or jail time. What's the difference between someone catapulting a rock into a 737 vs. a drone?
I think, perhaps, I didn't articulate what I meant properly
What I'm saying is that if your company treats you right, is courteous, professional, and considerate, you will in all likelihood repay that favor when it comes to you leaving. If your company mistreats you, then you are more likely to exhibit the same attitude when you leave. If everyone just considerate of each other, you wouldn't have this situation - but we all know that's not the case.
In other words, "do unto others as you would have them do unto you". I'm not religious but this whole story is just the 'Golden Rule' applying itself.
That was my sentiment too.
I'm up in Canada so 'at will' doesn't apply but I have personally the cold-hearted way companies treat hard working employees, and it's brutal. I imagine for people in demand, it's not even the fact they want to avoid 'tough discussions' - it's just that there's no "relationship" with a corporation. I bet the vast majority of people who leave will miss their colleagues and the people, but no-one is missing the "corporation".
Incidentally, I've seen what happens when you try to have that 'tough discussion'. The company may offer you a pay increase to stay, but you will be forever be labelled as "that guy who just wanted more money" despite the fact that a company exists only to make it's shareholders or owners money....
... is good for the gander
If your company is going to lay you off, it's not like they give you a whole lot of notice in most cases. You turn up for work, bright and eyed and bushy tailed, only to find a Manager and HR type waiting to give you some really bad news
Sure, most places have severance, but it's not like they take your feelings into consideration so if employees are just up and leaving, that's behavior the corporation does all the time
*looks at my 12x24 workshop*
*Looks at 72 million cubic feet workshop*
I need a new workshop. *Starting working on business case to convince wife*
I remember the first time I enabled OpenGL mode and was blown away by the visuals. I spent more time just walking around looking at stuff than playing in those first few hours
From the article:
"Further, when I have no narrative for what causes SSD failures, it feels like every SSD is an unpredictable time bomb. Are they healthy or are they going to die tomorrow? "
Emphasis mine. I feel like this guy has opportunities to improve his coping mechanism. For someone in Computer Sciences, it seems like he's way too worried about this. I'm not trying to be mean, but it's like if I got into a car accident and then questioned the entire safety design of all vehicles rather than just taking a few steps back and understanding it's a freak event, but not a totally unexpected one. If you've been driving for 30 years, statistically, you're likely to get into at least one accident, even if it's not your fault
*shrug* ?
I mean, manufacturing defects, environment, and just old plain bad luck? SSDs have come a long way, but if I have anything of importance, I'm RAID'ing it and backing up. I feel anyone with an understanding of technology knows the importance of this.
Honest question, I don't mean actual infrastructure as in power station, power lines, transformers etc, though those are obviously critical but what are EV manufacturers doing on top of just creating EV's?
Tesla has their supercharger network but I don't see any equivalent from Chevrolet, Ford, Mercedes, Jaguar, BMW etc. If I buy an EV from anyone other than Tesla, the *only* places I can charge is:
- At home. Assuming I have the ability to hook up a Level 2 or 3 charger. Let's be honest, a Level 1 charger won't do anything for you when you have an EV (not a Hybrid)
- At some public place (e.g. Mall, shopping center, Starbucks etc.)
- At work. Assuming your workplace has charging stations
At least with a Tesla, you have those options AND superchargers. I feel EV manufacturers should be forced to contribute to charging capabilities if they're gonna be churning out vehicles.
No, I really , genuinely want a 560SEC. I love the shape and design. But I don't want the mechanical headache of a 20+ year old car, even if it was made in the era of over-engineered Mercedes.
The poster below you suggested a Miata but I can't imagine anyone in the market for a 560SEC thinking a Miata hits all the same critera. I mean, they're both cars, but that's probably as much as they have in common.
I wouldn't have replaced ALL the shingles on my roof, only on the portion that wasn't covered by panels. I mean, the shingles under the panels are in great condition, so why bother? Plus, I'd have the added headache of having someone remove the panels and then re-install them.
To be fair .. that's a pretty broad assumption. There's plenty of people taking $600k mortgages and paying them quite comfortably.
Taking a $610k mortgage isn't going to hurt you in terms of monthly payments spread over 20 years.
I'm being serious. I had solar panels installed on half my roof a few years ago. They completely cover the shingles and when it rains, barely any rain/water ends up on the shingles. It just sheets away on the panel itself. Same for snow.
I bet, in 30 years time when the shingles on the other side have to be replaced, the ones under the panels will be pristine. There's still a 2" gap between the shingle and panel so airflow can evaporate any moisture but the elements aren't beating down on them.
The cost of replacing shingles should probably be factored into the overall cost of the panels - which are coming down in price year over year.
I think it would be more like,
"Oh look, the Sistine Chapel has a bunch of cracks and the paint is so faded that you can barely make out the art. Let me call in the folks who painted it ( ok, that will be difficult, but bear with me ) and ask them to fix all the things wrong with it so it can be enjoyed for another 50 years"
I don't think anyone buys an MG for the great handling :)
but if you've bought an MG and can improve the performance and reliability, it doesn't detract from the main reason you bought an MG. Which I'm assuming is you like the shape, the interior, and the size
If I could buy an 80's Mercedes 560SEC but replace the engine and transmission with an electric drive train, I would be a very happy person.
The number of cars that can be considered 'investments' is extremely small. Unless you have something like a Ferrari F40 or other super-niche super car, you've bought it to enjoy it, not to make money off it. The majority of super/hyper car owners buy them to actually drive them - I've joined a few owners forums and there are plenty of folks who drive their $1M+ vehicles practically daily.
If you have an old Aston Martin but find it difficult to drive because you know after an hour or so, it's gonna need a lot of TLC, switching to an electric drive train makes perfect sense.
I have a BMW 650 that is my summer car. However, like most BMW's, it suffers from the occasional oil leak, random blips during idle, and the ever looming threat of the SMG gearbox eating itself. Switching to an electric drive system would be perfect. I still get to enjoy driving it but don't have to worry about all the mechanical problems associated with an ICE..
Bah, that's nothing. I got a manual car where 1st gear doesn't work. And if you put it in first gear, it's a PITA trying to get it out. You have to disable the linkage and then not do that again
Even if a thief broke into my car, managed to hot wire it and got it started, what's the first thing they're gonna do? That's right, put it in first gear (I back into my parking spot) and then BAM!! they're done!
Engineer here. I feel like this argument is going nowhere but I'll try nonetheless to give a different perspective
Your cars brakes fail and you crash into a tree. If the following happened, the system is working as designed:
- Assuming total failure of the hydraulic braking system, you have a handbrake. In an emergency, you can use that to reduce your speed, but you lose some directional stability
- You can downshift gears to reduce speed. Directional stability remains unaffected but the rate of speed isn't reduced significantly
- You can throw the car into reverse or park. Some cars might not even let you do this, older ones will. You'll likely destroy major mechanical components but you'll also slow down pretty quick
- You crash into the tree. Your airbag, crumple zones etc. work in tandem to protect you. Car is likely a write off but hopefully your speed wasn't so high that you can still survive
In this context, individual components may have failed, but the system as a whole is working as designed. It's not even semantics, it's being able to step back and look at the system as a whole rather than focusing on individual components. A car is a system that consists of hundreds of components working together. If the fin component failed but other systems kicked in to account for that failure, then the system is indeed working as designed. Others have mentioned this numerous times, it just makes sense..
Brake engineers don't design their system in a vacuum, they do what they can to ensure brakes don't fail but they'll work with their drivetrain, safety, structural etc. peers to account for the possibility that their system may have a catastrophic failure and then need the other engineers to account for it.
We used comfree ($1,000 CAD) when selling our last home and it was fantastic. You get to post on their website and on MLS/Relator. We were very nervous about it initially but once we started getting a few interested people, we realized it was so easy. You still use a lawyer for the paperwork, and a good property lawyer will make sure you're covered but in reality, the vast majority of people aren't out to screw each other with a home purchase. And those that are are pretty easy to spot.
Negotiations were pretty straight forward. The buyers used a realtor and we went back and forth a few times before settling on a price. In fact, I think the actual negotiations took less than 30 mins. The most annoying thing about the whole transaction was random realtors coming to the house when they saw the comfree sign on the lawn trying to get us to sign with them because "they can sell the house much quicker".
I can't see realtors existing 10 years from now
Yup, at least in Canada, inspectors make you sign a waiver that essentially absolves the inspector of any and all responsibility of ANY problems found with the house. In fact, inspectors aren't even allowed (supposed?) to move anything so they can take a closer look. So, if you have a huge crack in the basement foundation, all you need to do is put a wardrobe in front of it and as far as the inspector is concerned, there's no crack.
If you think about it, there's no way an inspector can give you an accurate assessment of a house's structural quality or other problems in 2 hours.
bank is NOT going to be left holding... is that what I meant to say..
The idea behind appraisals is fine. An independent valuation of the property to ensure the bank is going to be left holding onto a property that it can't make it's money back on should the owner default on the mortgage
In reality, I don't think it actually works that way. When we bought our house a few years back, we went to our regular bank and as part of the mortgage process, they used their appraiser. House was selling for 850k, got appraised for 730k. Bank said we'd need to pony up an additional 120k to make up the difference.
This didn't smell right because other comparable houses in the neighborhood was selling around the same price, certainly nothing was close to 700k. In fact ours had more open land and was a few hundred sq ft larger than others. To get a second opinion, we went to a mortgage broker who shopped around a few banks. Two appraisers went out and valued it at 850k and 900k respectively.
We ended up going with one of the other banks but the fact there was such a wide variance in appraisals (730k to 900k) tells me this is a purely subjective exercise. There's probably little to no actual objectivity around this, other than a few check boxes the appraiser marks off.
If you really want to fix the problem, you'd implement an truly objective system that would take into account things like:
- Square footage
- Proximity to highways, shopping etc
- Acerage
- Accessibility to local schools (maybe even ranked schools)
- Traffic flow
- Number of beds, baths etc
And so on. Then, you can remove the human element from it all.
That's a bit harsh. Old people DO have morals.
Their backorder tells a different story. I would venture the 'market' for long-range EV's is huge but the people who can afford a $50K+ car is smaller than those who can afford up to $30K.
They won't run out of people to sell cars to. Lamborghini has a minuscule market and they don't have a problem selling cars.