Because you apparently don't understand what a research student is. It's someone who's considered trained in the subject to such an extent that they're able to do seminal research on it. The thing they're now being taught is how to do research, not the subject, since they already know enough about the subject that they're able to invent new parts of the subject.
Unsurprisingly, people who know so much about a subject that they're inventing a new part of it are generally trusted to teach other people about the basics of that subject.
My 2015 model has a range of 83 miles using the US tests or 118 miles based of NEDC. My 2015 model has never achieved more than 110 miles on a single charge even with the most careful 35 mph constant speed driving, its usual range, when not deliberately driving very carefully is around 80 miles for my commute (mostly freeway driving).
Long story short - the NEDC tests are not accurate, the US ones (at least in my experience) are pretty similar to reality. Based off the the US's testing, the 2018 eGolf has a 125 mile range, which is roughly half that of the Bolt's 236.
That said, the Bolt has uncomfortable seats, and was built out of cheep plastics, so the eGolf is still well and truly on the table.
I have a 2015 eGolf - it has a remote that reports battery status (amongst other things).
It is indeed an almost perfect car - my lease is about to expire, and I'm seriously considering another one despite its range being roughly half that of the Bolt.
Sorry, but that's revisionist history. Taxes are intended to pay for the services that are for the common good, not to promote specific industries and get us to "live right".
You seem to be confused - since when is social engineering people to buy things that will cause chunks of the US not to be under water, not for the common good?
Eh? Since when is social engineering not one of the valid reasons to collect tax in the US?
"The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States"
This is to provide for the general welfare of the united states - specifically, by getting people to use renewables rather than burning petrolium directly in their car, large parts of the United States might avoid being under water due to global warming.
Which was exactly the goal - encourage those manufacturers to make electric cars, because it became more profitable. In doing so, encourage research into battery technology, and push us along the experience curve to make batteries cheaper, and more viable both for cars and grid storage.
That's not true at all. The market looks only at the short term.
Oil has a (mostly) fixed (if you look at it charitably - actually it's increasing) cost of production, but it's still the cheapest way to fuel a vehicle, mostly because of the huge capitol cost of a battery.
Batteries meanwhile have a decreasing cost that goes in line with our experience producing them, as technology improves.
By introducing this subsidy we force the industry to push us along the battery experience curve faster. That in turn causes batteries to become the cheaper option faster. There's no question that they will be the cheaper option at some point, this just forces them to become that cheaper option before the market's shortsightedness would normally do so.
Long story short - it's known that batteries will be more viable than oil in the market at some point. The goal here is to get to that point sooner and lower costs for everyone.
Folks who can afford electric vehicles tend to be much more affluent than the normal folks who need to bust the piggy bank for the small change to barely scrape it over the price finish line. So, in this case, the plan would actually stick it to the rich.
I don't think that's a reasonable point at all. EVs can be had for pretty incredibly low rates (e.g. eGlofs are advertised at around $49 a month on lease). These are far from rich people's toys.
Further, the goal of this credit is not to bias either way to rich or poor, it's to encourage the manufacturers to build these cars, and in doing so cause us to build a crap ton more batteries. That will push us down the experience curve on battery production and get us to a point where EVs *and* electric grid storage become far more viable.
"The Universe should not exist" is the press simplification of "the observable physics shows no reason why matter and anti-matter should be in an imbalance, however, clearly they are in an imbalance, so... WTF!"
I've been asked the question by recruiters at major tech companies. It's been pretty quickly shut down by "I'm not in the Bay Area currently, I don't think what I'm on just now is in any way relevant to how much I should be paid over there".
Actually, it's been pretty rigorously demonstrated at this point that teenagers bodies really genuinely do need sleep later in the day than adult ones. They really are biologically late sleepers, and late risers.
I've actually had exactly the reverse experience. One of my cats knows where the light comes from, and goes for there. My child when she was very young did not, and was just as fascinated as a cat at the little red dot flying around the floor.
It doesn't help at all. The first thing anyone even WITH source code would do to analyze the kinds of network requests a blob of code made would be to run the whole environment in something like Charles' Proxy, and observe what network requests go out.
Yes - that's because everyone other than Tesla uses J1772 for AC charging. CCS combo is J1772 + some extra pins to enable DC charging too. The only Chevy that currently supports DC charging is the Bolt - which uses CCS combo.
As I said above - every EV maker other than Tesla and Nissan that supports DC charging uses CCS combo.
It's fine because part of the 1st amendment is that they're free to hold those beliefs, and act upon them, and you're free to not use their services and ostracise them as a result.
What makes you think corporations becoming larger than the government will happen? That's one of many things that anti-competition law is designed to prevent.
The irony being that CCS combo has pretty much won the charging battle at this point. Only Tesla and Nissan use something else, meanwhile BMW, VW, Audi, Chevrolet, Mercedes, and Ford all use CCS combo for DC charging.
Slashdot Mirror
Because you apparently don't understand what a research student is. It's someone who's considered trained in the subject to such an extent that they're able to do seminal research on it. The thing they're now being taught is how to do research, not the subject, since they already know enough about the subject that they're able to invent new parts of the subject.
Unsurprisingly, people who know so much about a subject that they're inventing a new part of it are generally trusted to teach other people about the basics of that subject.
My 2015 model has a range of 83 miles using the US tests or 118 miles based of NEDC. My 2015 model has never achieved more than 110 miles on a single charge even with the most careful 35 mph constant speed driving, its usual range, when not deliberately driving very carefully is around 80 miles for my commute (mostly freeway driving).
Long story short - the NEDC tests are not accurate, the US ones (at least in my experience) are pretty similar to reality. Based off the the US's testing, the 2018 eGolf has a 125 mile range, which is roughly half that of the Bolt's 236.
That said, the Bolt has uncomfortable seats, and was built out of cheep plastics, so the eGolf is still well and truly on the table.
I have a 2015 eGolf - it has a remote that reports battery status (amongst other things).
It is indeed an almost perfect car - my lease is about to expire, and I'm seriously considering another one despite its range being roughly half that of the Bolt.
How are we talking about illegal immigration? We're talking about people legally getting visas to come to the US to study...
Well, Firemen are occupying that waiting time with a bunch of stuff that is also their job like physical training, or maintaining vehicles.
Paid time off is legally mandated for all employed people in the UK.
Sorry, but that's revisionist history. Taxes are intended to pay for the services that are for the common good, not to promote specific industries and get us to "live right".
You seem to be confused - since when is social engineering people to buy things that will cause chunks of the US not to be under water, not for the common good?
Eh? Since when is social engineering not one of the valid reasons to collect tax in the US?
"The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States"
This is to provide for the general welfare of the united states - specifically, by getting people to use renewables rather than burning petrolium directly in their car, large parts of the United States might avoid being under water due to global warming.
What makes you think that a leaf, or eGolf (both of which can be had for about $40-$50 a month on lease) are luxury cars?
Which was exactly the goal - encourage those manufacturers to make electric cars, because it became more profitable. In doing so, encourage research into battery technology, and push us along the experience curve to make batteries cheaper, and more viable both for cars and grid storage.
What makes you think that these are for the well off? You can lease an eGolf for $49 a month - that's hardly well off rates.
That's not true at all. The market looks only at the short term.
Oil has a (mostly) fixed (if you look at it charitably - actually it's increasing) cost of production, but it's still the cheapest way to fuel a vehicle, mostly because of the huge capitol cost of a battery.
Batteries meanwhile have a decreasing cost that goes in line with our experience producing them, as technology improves.
By introducing this subsidy we force the industry to push us along the battery experience curve faster. That in turn causes batteries to become the cheaper option faster. There's no question that they will be the cheaper option at some point, this just forces them to become that cheaper option before the market's shortsightedness would normally do so.
Long story short - it's known that batteries will be more viable than oil in the market at some point. The goal here is to get to that point sooner and lower costs for everyone.
Folks who can afford electric vehicles tend to be much more affluent than the normal folks who need to bust the piggy bank for the small change to barely scrape it over the price finish line. So, in this case, the plan would actually stick it to the rich.
I don't think that's a reasonable point at all. EVs can be had for pretty incredibly low rates (e.g. eGlofs are advertised at around $49 a month on lease). These are far from rich people's toys.
Further, the goal of this credit is not to bias either way to rich or poor, it's to encourage the manufacturers to build these cars, and in doing so cause us to build a crap ton more batteries. That will push us down the experience curve on battery production and get us to a point where EVs *and* electric grid storage become far more viable.
Not any more it doesn't.
By "press simplification" I meant "the author simplified things for the press"
Sure it is, and that's the point they're making.
"The Universe should not exist" is the press simplification of "the observable physics shows no reason why matter and anti-matter should be in an imbalance, however, clearly they are in an imbalance, so... WTF!"
Congratulations, with your awesome strategy, you can now not succeed in hiring anyone in the highly competitive market for software engineers in CA.
I've been asked the question by recruiters at major tech companies. It's been pretty quickly shut down by "I'm not in the Bay Area currently, I don't think what I'm on just now is in any way relevant to how much I should be paid over there".
It does, but the BFR plans to use methylox fuel.
Actually, it's been pretty rigorously demonstrated at this point that teenagers bodies really genuinely do need sleep later in the day than adult ones. They really are biologically late sleepers, and late risers.
I've actually had exactly the reverse experience. One of my cats knows where the light comes from, and goes for there. My child when she was very young did not, and was just as fascinated as a cat at the little red dot flying around the floor.
It doesn't help at all. The first thing anyone even WITH source code would do to analyze the kinds of network requests a blob of code made would be to run the whole environment in something like Charles' Proxy, and observe what network requests go out.
My Volt (Chevy) uses J1772.
Yes - that's because everyone other than Tesla uses J1772 for AC charging. CCS combo is J1772 + some extra pins to enable DC charging too. The only Chevy that currently supports DC charging is the Bolt - which uses CCS combo.
As I said above - every EV maker other than Tesla and Nissan that supports DC charging uses CCS combo.
It's fine because part of the 1st amendment is that they're free to hold those beliefs, and act upon them, and you're free to not use their services and ostracise them as a result.
What makes you think corporations becoming larger than the government will happen? That's one of many things that anti-competition law is designed to prevent.
The irony being that CCS combo has pretty much won the charging battle at this point. Only Tesla and Nissan use something else, meanwhile BMW, VW, Audi, Chevrolet, Mercedes, and Ford all use CCS combo for DC charging.