A company is showing dedication to their own products and is not trying to obsolete their old products as fast as possible to sell a few more new ones
It's a sound business model. Those classic car owners can probably afford the price even at double what it actually cost Aston Martin (and that's probably what they'll charge). And there's already a few small outfits offering this service for classic cars.
But for ordinary cars it's just not going to make economic sense unless prices come down a lot. And to think the movie Back to the Future II predicted we'd be able to buy conversion kits to make our old cars fly... (for only $49,995)
Isn't this the case already in many other countries? The real question is: what are the requirements for law enforcement agencies to be able to force companies to cooperate? Do they get a back door to listen in on everything? Can they ask any time they want? Or is it limited to individuals involved in crimes of a certain severity? Does it require a court order?
In any case: for services that I make use of, I do not want the service provider to answer such requests with "We won't". The correct answer is: "We can't".
Designing for safety means taking possible mechanical failures into account. Either you provide redundant backups, or have the system fail gracefully (as in this case), or both. So the system did work as designed.
It's nice not to need a car (I was in that position a decade ago). But why are you so opposed to owning one? To the point where you'd leave the country to avoid owning one? Much of the USA is a pretty awesome place (the parts I visited anyway), so get a car and move.
If you come to Europe, you will probably find that unless you live in the center of one of the larger cities - where most people couldn't afford a decent place to live - you still need a car. You will also find that car ownership is 2-3 times as expensive as it is in the US.
There are plenty of people here, in our free society, who would not mind some of what the Chinese have. A ban on certain opinions. Bans or controls on addictive substances. Extensive monitoring of public and private life to catch fraudsters and such. A strong authoritative leader. Suppression of certain social groups. Thinkofthechildrenism. No violent video games or movies. Harsh punishment for antisocial behaviour. People have a strong aversion to being controlled, but they just love to impose controls on others.
It’s “only” a ballistic ride, but still... if he discusses the timeline in terms of “reasonable confident” one month before the deadline, then I am not at all confident in their management of the project, or their ability to deliver.
This argument comes up in any discussion about what language we should use. The choice of language is somewhat secondary; what really matters is the exact meaning of the word "should" in that sentence. Or rather: what the consequences are of using the wrong language - in any situation. Most people would agree that it's better not to use swear words or insults, but what happens if someone does? Being told off for bad manners, having bad words censored, seeing your pull request denied or your paper rejected, public shaming, being ostracized from the community, fired, or even prosecuted in court? When people talk about acceptable language in their communities these days, the full range of those consequences will be openly discussed and often seriously considered.
It's good to have a code of conduct - written or unwritten - in any community, but when transgressions carry serious consequences, you'll invariably see some perverted snowflakes push the boundaries of what's acceptable, and gleefully call out violators, especially those with opposing viewpoints. Can't say fuck anymore. Or black. Or master / slave. Peek and poke? Nope. Male / female connectors are out. Can't insult anyone or anything... and you violate that rule whenever someone, anyone feels insulted. Or just crabby.
Codes of conduct regarding acceptable language are best left unwritten, and are certainly best left undiscussed at length. Because the more you discuss them, the more you formalize them, the worse they get.
What3words seems nice because you get down to 3m resolution with just 3 words: easy to remember. Memorizing your Plus code is a lot harder, some people have trouble remembering their zip code, typically 6-7 characters. Are there any other (unique) advantages to Plus Codes?
You can have all that in a smart home... except the maintenance part. Home automation is still in the hobby / tinkerers phase, and these installations are not maintenance free and certainly not turn-key. My own installation is currently very stable, but it took me a few years to get there, and I still need to fiddle with something or other every other month or so. And that's considered best of class reliability in this price range (more expensive systems break almost as often, but then the price includes a repair guy)
Exactly. Then there's the group who might technically even be innocent but enter into a plea bargain because they cannot afford a proper defense.
The punishment for copyright infringement should be a sensible, reasonable fine. Not a life ruined for sharing a couple of songs. Especially when we're talking people simply using a P2P program, rather than people sharing because they are motivated by profit (large scale sites)
He's just setting a goal, which is good. When the choice comes between no power or keeping the nukes running, sure, he will probably opt for the latter. Keep in mind they are certainly not doing away with nuclear, they are closing a couple of the 1st gen plants a bit sooner, and they are probably near end of life anyway.
it'll behave like a regular switch but will have a mechanical actuator to flip it remotely.
Sounds like overkill. There's not much choice in switches, agreed, but the ones I use (Z-Wave from Düwi, Zwave.me and Fibaro) all have a local switch that turns the lights on and off pretty much instantly, even when the Z-wave network is down or the switch is not configured. The Fibaro modules can be wired to work with my existing mechanical switches, sitting behind it (a tight fit to be sure), and that also work instantly, though the module does need to be configured for that to work.
I'd love some smart outlets as well, but I haven't found any that fit euro pattress boxes. Then again I can stick those Fibaro modules behind them.
Very good point. I have had a few Z-Wave switches die on me as well due to what I suspect are heat issues. Luckily, Euro pattress boxes are a little roomier, and I went with Düwi switches. Feature-poor and a little old fashioned in terms of Z-Wave functionality, but they keep going, and each dimmer even comes with its own spare fuse... German gründlichkeit.
As for the price of this stuff, isn't the Z-Wave license fee a big part of that? Also: some jackass holds a patent on "instant notification", the idea that if you switch a light on using the wall switch, the central controller is instantly notified of the change rather than learning of it through a periodic status poll. That patent alone adds €s to the price; these days people expect that switches support that functionality.
Still, with high prices (higher still in Europe, believe me...) I didn't find the total overall cost to be that daunting. I did spend a few thousand € on fully automating the house, but I do get a much lower heating bill out of it (Z-Wave allows me to control radiators separately in each room, so we only heat the ones that are in use). And the convenience is worth it - even according to the wife, which is the only real yardstick by which to measure such things.
What does surprise me about the home automation market is that a lot of manufacturers seem to think we want shoddy products that look like crap, while the functionality isn't very well thought through: there always seems to be one maddingly missing link that keeps us from doing what we want with them. Fibaro are an exception: I can't speak for their controller but their peripherals work very well, they are designed well and feel like premium products.
He's talking about the morality of deplatforming, not the legality. Deplatforming is nothing less than an effort to silence opposing viewpoints. Argue about the legal rights and the wrongs of the matter all you want, but if you think deplatforming is morally ok, you're on the wrong side of free speech.
Not sure about that. Manufacturers are starting to build vehicles that have been designed as EVs from the ground up. And they are getting wise to the fact that consumers want normal looking EVs, not hideous design mistakes. My understanding is that a couple of these companies are simply having a real hard time sourcing the batteries. This is not just a shakeup in car design, but in their production lines and logistics as well, and such things take some time and effort (as Tesla found out).
I test drove the electric Kona, and I was pretty impressed with it overall. It looks decent, drives nicely, and doesn't feel like a compromise in any aspect either. So I decided to order that one rather than a Tesla 3, mostly because I prefer the Kona's interior. And the new Kia doesn't look that bad either.
Hyundai had no need to develop an electric Kona to comply with regulations, as they are already producing the Ioniq. But they sell almost all of these in Europe anyway; apparently Hyundai (who have to comply with CARB since 2017) will offer another compliance car in California: a hydrogen fuel cell powered car, for lease only. Besides compliance, they are probably interesting in further exploring the technology; a couple have appeared on the road here in the Netherlands as well.
Tesla made quite a few advances in battery tech and the production of batteries (together with Panasonic), their batteries are by far the cheapest per kWh. They also put a lot of effort into battery charging and conditioning, something that other automakers still struggle with, especially when it comes to fast charging (BMW and the Hyundai Ioniq had issues with that). Other automakers are building on the lessons learned from the Tesla drivetrains. So while they didn't invent the electric car, it's fair to say that they re-invented it with a great many innovations. Other auto makers are catching up and in a few cases like low-range EVs they are pulling ahead, but Tesla is still beating them on volume. Hell, Tesla is beating Mercedes on overall sales, in the US.
At least they are producing the long and mid range Model 3 now, and they are making many of them. Which is good, there aren't that many options on the market with comparable range (around 400km), price and specs. You have the Hyundai Kona and the Kia e-Niro, and not much else. And the waiting lists for those already stretches to over a year, they just don't make enough of them. Huyndai expects to make 30.000 EVs a year... less than Tesla makes in a month.
Not really. He wants the state to be able to see who receives money (so they can properly assess income tax and VAT), but not where that money is from. The state can see that I got 5 talers from you (and if I don't declare them they can ask questions about that). They can see that Pornhub received 5 talers for access to certain videos (and charge them the right VAT on that transaction). But they cannot see where I spent my 5 talers. Assessing taxes on monetary transactions is the state's business, but where I spend my money isn't. It also isn't anyone else's business. This coin supposedly is an answer to that problem.
As for it not being peer-to-peer: most people don't give a rat's arse about that: they want to be able to spend anonymously using a mechanism that allows for instant and cheap transactions. Likewise, banks like the idea of an easy, fast, cheap mechanism for settlement. The real question is: can it deliver on that score?
Slashdot Mirror
A company is showing dedication to their own products and is not trying to obsolete their old products as fast as possible to sell a few more new ones
It's a sound business model. Those classic car owners can probably afford the price even at double what it actually cost Aston Martin (and that's probably what they'll charge). And there's already a few small outfits offering this service for classic cars.
But for ordinary cars it's just not going to make economic sense unless prices come down a lot. And to think the movie Back to the Future II predicted we'd be able to buy conversion kits to make our old cars fly... (for only $49,995)
Isn't this the case already in many other countries? The real question is: what are the requirements for law enforcement agencies to be able to force companies to cooperate? Do they get a back door to listen in on everything? Can they ask any time they want? Or is it limited to individuals involved in crimes of a certain severity? Does it require a court order?
In any case: for services that I make use of, I do not want the service provider to answer such requests with "We won't". The correct answer is: "We can't".
Designing for safety means taking possible mechanical failures into account. Either you provide redundant backups, or have the system fail gracefully (as in this case), or both. So the system did work as designed.
It's nice not to need a car (I was in that position a decade ago). But why are you so opposed to owning one? To the point where you'd leave the country to avoid owning one? Much of the USA is a pretty awesome place (the parts I visited anyway), so get a car and move.
If you come to Europe, you will probably find that unless you live in the center of one of the larger cities - where most people couldn't afford a decent place to live - you still need a car. You will also find that car ownership is 2-3 times as expensive as it is in the US.
You mean grasping at Strings
There are plenty of people here, in our free society, who would not mind some of what the Chinese have. A ban on certain opinions. Bans or controls on addictive substances. Extensive monitoring of public and private life to catch fraudsters and such. A strong authoritative leader. Suppression of certain social groups. Thinkofthechildrenism. No violent video games or movies. Harsh punishment for antisocial behaviour. People have a strong aversion to being controlled, but they just love to impose controls on others.
It’s “only” a ballistic ride, but still... if he discusses the timeline in terms of “reasonable confident” one month before the deadline, then I am not at all confident in their management of the project, or their ability to deliver.
This argument comes up in any discussion about what language we should use. The choice of language is somewhat secondary; what really matters is the exact meaning of the word "should" in that sentence. Or rather: what the consequences are of using the wrong language - in any situation. Most people would agree that it's better not to use swear words or insults, but what happens if someone does? Being told off for bad manners, having bad words censored, seeing your pull request denied or your paper rejected, public shaming, being ostracized from the community, fired, or even prosecuted in court? When people talk about acceptable language in their communities these days, the full range of those consequences will be openly discussed and often seriously considered.
It's good to have a code of conduct - written or unwritten - in any community, but when transgressions carry serious consequences, you'll invariably see some perverted snowflakes push the boundaries of what's acceptable, and gleefully call out violators, especially those with opposing viewpoints. Can't say fuck anymore. Or black. Or master / slave. Peek and poke? Nope. Male / female connectors are out. Can't insult anyone or anything... and you violate that rule whenever someone, anyone feels insulted. Or just crabby.
Codes of conduct regarding acceptable language are best left unwritten, and are certainly best left undiscussed at length. Because the more you discuss them, the more you formalize them, the worse they get.
What3words seems nice because you get down to 3m resolution with just 3 words: easy to remember. Memorizing your Plus code is a lot harder, some people have trouble remembering their zip code, typically 6-7 characters. Are there any other (unique) advantages to Plus Codes?
Don't they go after the insurance companies?
You can have all that in a smart home... except the maintenance part. Home automation is still in the hobby / tinkerers phase, and these installations are not maintenance free and certainly not turn-key. My own installation is currently very stable, but it took me a few years to get there, and I still need to fiddle with something or other every other month or so. And that's considered best of class reliability in this price range (more expensive systems break almost as often, but then the price includes a repair guy)
They weren’t fined for the breach but for failure to disclose it.
have to be offset by planting trees or by burying them underground.
How does burying trees underground help reduce emissions?
Exactly. Then there's the group who might technically even be innocent but enter into a plea bargain because they cannot afford a proper defense.
The punishment for copyright infringement should be a sensible, reasonable fine. Not a life ruined for sharing a couple of songs. Especially when we're talking people simply using a P2P program, rather than people sharing because they are motivated by profit (large scale sites)
He's just setting a goal, which is good. When the choice comes between no power or keeping the nukes running, sure, he will probably opt for the latter. Keep in mind they are certainly not doing away with nuclear, they are closing a couple of the 1st gen plants a bit sooner, and they are probably near end of life anyway.
it'll behave like a regular switch but will have a mechanical actuator to flip it remotely.
Sounds like overkill. There's not much choice in switches, agreed, but the ones I use (Z-Wave from Düwi, Zwave.me and Fibaro) all have a local switch that turns the lights on and off pretty much instantly, even when the Z-wave network is down or the switch is not configured. The Fibaro modules can be wired to work with my existing mechanical switches, sitting behind it (a tight fit to be sure), and that also work instantly, though the module does need to be configured for that to work. I'd love some smart outlets as well, but I haven't found any that fit euro pattress boxes. Then again I can stick those Fibaro modules behind them.
Very good point. I have had a few Z-Wave switches die on me as well due to what I suspect are heat issues. Luckily, Euro pattress boxes are a little roomier, and I went with Düwi switches. Feature-poor and a little old fashioned in terms of Z-Wave functionality, but they keep going, and each dimmer even comes with its own spare fuse... German gründlichkeit.
As for the price of this stuff, isn't the Z-Wave license fee a big part of that? Also: some jackass holds a patent on "instant notification", the idea that if you switch a light on using the wall switch, the central controller is instantly notified of the change rather than learning of it through a periodic status poll. That patent alone adds €s to the price; these days people expect that switches support that functionality. Still, with high prices (higher still in Europe, believe me...) I didn't find the total overall cost to be that daunting. I did spend a few thousand € on fully automating the house, but I do get a much lower heating bill out of it (Z-Wave allows me to control radiators separately in each room, so we only heat the ones that are in use). And the convenience is worth it - even according to the wife, which is the only real yardstick by which to measure such things.
What does surprise me about the home automation market is that a lot of manufacturers seem to think we want shoddy products that look like crap, while the functionality isn't very well thought through: there always seems to be one maddingly missing link that keeps us from doing what we want with them. Fibaro are an exception: I can't speak for their controller but their peripherals work very well, they are designed well and feel like premium products.
He's talking about the morality of deplatforming, not the legality. Deplatforming is nothing less than an effort to silence opposing viewpoints. Argue about the legal rights and the wrongs of the matter all you want, but if you think deplatforming is morally ok, you're on the wrong side of free speech.
Not sure about that. Manufacturers are starting to build vehicles that have been designed as EVs from the ground up. And they are getting wise to the fact that consumers want normal looking EVs, not hideous design mistakes. My understanding is that a couple of these companies are simply having a real hard time sourcing the batteries. This is not just a shakeup in car design, but in their production lines and logistics as well, and such things take some time and effort (as Tesla found out).
I test drove the electric Kona, and I was pretty impressed with it overall. It looks decent, drives nicely, and doesn't feel like a compromise in any aspect either. So I decided to order that one rather than a Tesla 3, mostly because I prefer the Kona's interior. And the new Kia doesn't look that bad either.
Innovating is not inventing, it is bringing those inventions to the market.
Hyundai had no need to develop an electric Kona to comply with regulations, as they are already producing the Ioniq. But they sell almost all of these in Europe anyway; apparently Hyundai (who have to comply with CARB since 2017) will offer another compliance car in California: a hydrogen fuel cell powered car, for lease only. Besides compliance, they are probably interesting in further exploring the technology; a couple have appeared on the road here in the Netherlands as well.
Tesla made quite a few advances in battery tech and the production of batteries (together with Panasonic), their batteries are by far the cheapest per kWh. They also put a lot of effort into battery charging and conditioning, something that other automakers still struggle with, especially when it comes to fast charging (BMW and the Hyundai Ioniq had issues with that). Other automakers are building on the lessons learned from the Tesla drivetrains. So while they didn't invent the electric car, it's fair to say that they re-invented it with a great many innovations. Other auto makers are catching up and in a few cases like low-range EVs they are pulling ahead, but Tesla is still beating them on volume. Hell, Tesla is beating Mercedes on overall sales, in the US.
At least they are producing the long and mid range Model 3 now, and they are making many of them. Which is good, there aren't that many options on the market with comparable range (around 400km), price and specs. You have the Hyundai Kona and the Kia e-Niro, and not much else. And the waiting lists for those already stretches to over a year, they just don't make enough of them. Huyndai expects to make 30.000 EVs a year... less than Tesla makes in a month.
Bitcoin is more like a store of oversold expectations.
Not really. He wants the state to be able to see who receives money (so they can properly assess income tax and VAT), but not where that money is from. The state can see that I got 5 talers from you (and if I don't declare them they can ask questions about that). They can see that Pornhub received 5 talers for access to certain videos (and charge them the right VAT on that transaction). But they cannot see where I spent my 5 talers. Assessing taxes on monetary transactions is the state's business, but where I spend my money isn't. It also isn't anyone else's business. This coin supposedly is an answer to that problem.
As for it not being peer-to-peer: most people don't give a rat's arse about that: they want to be able to spend anonymously using a mechanism that allows for instant and cheap transactions. Likewise, banks like the idea of an easy, fast, cheap mechanism for settlement. The real question is: can it deliver on that score?