That kind of bullshit is exactly what's wrong with America.
"If you didn't make good decisions when you were at an age where your brain is not developed, and everyone makes shit decisions all the time, then you're fucked" is just not an acceptable statement. Especially this applies when most of the people making those bad decisions are living in a home where their parents just don't give a shit, and never point out to them that school actually matters (or anything else for that matter). They're often living in a home where they don't even actually have a real bed, and hence doing this on shitty amounts of sleep. They're often doing it in a home where there's a very real chance that they'll get the shit beaten out of them, or have to witness the shit getting beaten out of someone they care about. They're often doing it in a home where there's a good chance that they won't eat.
The level of stress that the poor are under is huge, expecting a 12 year old, with an undeveloped brain to make a good decision that affects them for the rest of their life is ridiculous. Then telling them "well, you made your bed, lie in it" and giving them no assistance is even more so.
Actually, that's not true. Facebook for example is huge because of code size, not because of asset size.
They have literally thousands of classes for a super simple application. In fact, their code is so large, unwieldy and complex that they wrote an entire IDE, because the traditional IDEs couldn't deal with the sheer amount of code they have.
I don't know why it didn't occur to them to just write better code, but apparently it didn't.
The prioritisation of these bugs is indeed a problem, but I would argue that the problem is not with prioritising bugs, it's directly with how people think that these particular bugs should be prioritised.
Significant size, performance, and power regressions should be considered right up their with the operational bugs, and severe ones should be considered more important. The only bugs that should beat them out should be security bugs (which I guess means most crashes too).
From what I understand of the chaos at some of these companies (particularly FaceBook and Twitter), it's got more to do with the lack of engineering discipline, and a lack of good quality engineers.
Facebook at one stage had 17,000 classes in their app. Most of them duplicated each other, but because the whole app is just a wild west of development, no one knows, or cares what their code duplicates.
It's more important to throw in the new feature than to make sure the code is structured in a sensible way.
50-100% above median income hardly makes someone rich. In fact, it pretty much exactly makes them middle class. In the US, 53% of the population is lower or working class. So that median income is below the boundary for middle class.
I do understand how DC charging works, and none of what you said contradicts anything at all that I said. It may be really hard, but it's slowly being solved. Several vendors have already standardised:
Cars with CCS1:
- VW eGolf
- Chevy Bolt
- Chevy Spark
- BMW i3
- Ford Focus electric
Cars with CHAdeMO:
- Nissan Leaf
Cars with Tesla DC charging:
- Tesla Model S
- Tesla Model X
Cars that are coming out soon supporting CCS:
- Audi Q6 electric
- Jaguar iPace
- Porsche Mission E
- Mercedes Generation EQ
- Ford Explorer EV
Cars coming soon with CHAdeMO:
Cars coming soon with Tesla DC dhargnging:
- Tesla Model 3.
As you can see, this already pretty much is standardised. CCS has won.
That standard only supports up to 240V/50A AC charging.
The issue is in the standardisation of DC charging.
Thankfully, CCS1 seems to be winning the race at the moment. It's likely that VW will install only CCS1 stations, since their US cars all use it. But Nissan and Tesla are still notable holdouts on not using CCS1.
To be fair to said hi tax states, they're also the states that have the highest GDPs, and the highest tax takes. Trying to claim that the low-state-tax states are subsidising them is kinda crazy, when they contribute more to the tax pool than their population suggests they should.
Interesting, thanks for the info. That said, it seems somewhat backwards to me. If you wanted to remove one, the deduction on mortgage interest seems reasonable - the government isn't penalising you that money, you made a choice to pay it.
The state and local taxes on the other hand, by not having that deduction, causes people to be double-taxed, which is weird.
Of course, with my cynical hat on... if you wanted to penalise left leaning people, double-taxing people in states that pay high state and local taxes would be a good way to do it.
Middle class isn't a function purely of wage in the US, since income, and cost of living varies wildly across the country.
In the UK, someone earning £80,000 is pretty much going to be well off whether they're living in Dundee, or London - though they're going to be more well off in Dundee.
In the US, someone earning $150,000 will be very well off if they live in Birmingham, but be pretty badly off if they live in the SF bay area (which is likely, because that's where all the jobs that pay $150-300k are).
Most of the people earning $150-300k will be living in a place like the SF bay area (because that's where the work that pays that much is), where their income is 12.5-25% of the median cost of a home.
No, this is a story about raising taxes on the middle class, and it's notably not a story about cutting them on the lower classes. It's a story about cutting them on the wealthy.
It's actually going to be more painful for those expensive areas like SF.
One of the proposals in Trump's tax plan is to drop the deductions for state and local taxes, and for mortgage interest. The areas where people earn $150-300k are usually the areas with high state and local taxes, and where houses cost a lot.
The range needs to be infinity because they take too fucking long to recharge.
Why? Current EVs can charge at 24kW, giving them 100 miles of range per hour. ChargePoint's new DC chargers can charge at 100kW, giving vehicles 400 miles of range per hour. Humans sleep for at least 7 hours per 24, giving the vehicle a potential 2800 miles of range per sleep cycle, which is way above the distance they can drive in the other 17 hours.
Given that, it seems like there's an upper bound on the "what range is enough range" at 2800 miles. In practice, that upper bound is also way too high. In practice, humans really want to be able to drive continuously from 7am until 11am, eat lunch, drive continuously from 11:30am until 5pm, eat dinner, and drive continuously from 6pm until 9pm, and sleep, in even the most extreme examples.
In that example, we've got 4 hours of driving, at average 80mph (way higher than anyone realistically can actually average) = 320 miles. DC charge over lunch at Chargepoint's new rate gets them another 200 miles of range = 120 miles used. 5.5 hours at 80mph + 120 = 560 miles of range used. An hour of charging gets us back down to 160 miles of range used. Then 3 hours of driving at 80mph gets us back up to 400 miles of range used. The most drained the battery ever got in that journey was 560 miles, so we've established a lower upper bound here.
Any vehicle with 560 miles of range and Chargepoint's new 400A charging system is sufficient for all reasonable driving a human will do.
In practice, vehicles with 300 miles of range, and 100A charging are sufficient for 99.9% of the driving that people do. That 0.1% remaining can easily be filled by special purpose vehicles.
Also irrelevant as long as the range is long enough.
are boring to drive
That's not been true for many many years - every hypercar these days is going the electric route because they're *way* more fun to drive than petrol cars thanks to the instant torque.
Except most employment stats (at least the ones governments tout) don't include people who'd really like a full time position but have grabbed a part time job just to keep from losing everything.
The stat you're looking for is called underemployment, not unemployment.
Yes - in other words, you pay more for the service that delivers it for you, and you only.
There's no denying that it's cheaper for the store to do it in the bulk-handling way, that doesn't mean that shipping is "free" though. They absolutely are charging more for the case where they deliver it to your door, just framing it as "have a discount if you don't want delivery to your door".
Slashdot Mirror
What happens is that they're an idiot, and they learn not to be an idiot next time.
That kind of bullshit is exactly what's wrong with America.
"If you didn't make good decisions when you were at an age where your brain is not developed, and everyone makes shit decisions all the time, then you're fucked" is just not an acceptable statement. Especially this applies when most of the people making those bad decisions are living in a home where their parents just don't give a shit, and never point out to them that school actually matters (or anything else for that matter). They're often living in a home where they don't even actually have a real bed, and hence doing this on shitty amounts of sleep. They're often doing it in a home where there's a very real chance that they'll get the shit beaten out of them, or have to witness the shit getting beaten out of someone they care about. They're often doing it in a home where there's a good chance that they won't eat.
The level of stress that the poor are under is huge, expecting a 12 year old, with an undeveloped brain to make a good decision that affects them for the rest of their life is ridiculous. Then telling them "well, you made your bed, lie in it" and giving them no assistance is even more so.
Actually, that's not true. Facebook for example is huge because of code size, not because of asset size.
They have literally thousands of classes for a super simple application. In fact, their code is so large, unwieldy and complex that they wrote an entire IDE, because the traditional IDEs couldn't deal with the sheer amount of code they have.
I don't know why it didn't occur to them to just write better code, but apparently it didn't.
The prioritisation of these bugs is indeed a problem, but I would argue that the problem is not with prioritising bugs, it's directly with how people think that these particular bugs should be prioritised.
Significant size, performance, and power regressions should be considered right up their with the operational bugs, and severe ones should be considered more important. The only bugs that should beat them out should be security bugs (which I guess means most crashes too).
From what I understand of the chaos at some of these companies (particularly FaceBook and Twitter), it's got more to do with the lack of engineering discipline, and a lack of good quality engineers.
Facebook at one stage had 17,000 classes in their app. Most of them duplicated each other, but because the whole app is just a wild west of development, no one knows, or cares what their code duplicates.
It's more important to throw in the new feature than to make sure the code is structured in a sensible way.
50-100% above median income hardly makes someone rich. In fact, it pretty much exactly makes them middle class. In the US, 53% of the population is lower or working class. So that median income is below the boundary for middle class.
I do understand how DC charging works, and none of what you said contradicts anything at all that I said. It may be really hard, but it's slowly being solved. Several vendors have already standardised:
Cars with CCS1:
- VW eGolf
- Chevy Bolt
- Chevy Spark
- BMW i3
- Ford Focus electric
Cars with CHAdeMO:
- Nissan Leaf
Cars with Tesla DC charging:
- Tesla Model S
- Tesla Model X
Cars that are coming out soon supporting CCS:
- Audi Q6 electric
- Jaguar iPace
- Porsche Mission E
- Mercedes Generation EQ
- Ford Explorer EV
Cars coming soon with CHAdeMO:
Cars coming soon with Tesla DC dhargnging:
- Tesla Model 3.
As you can see, this already pretty much is standardised. CCS has won.
That standard only supports up to 240V/50A AC charging.
The issue is in the standardisation of DC charging.
Thankfully, CCS1 seems to be winning the race at the moment. It's likely that VW will install only CCS1 stations, since their US cars all use it. But Nissan and Tesla are still notable holdouts on not using CCS1.
Nissan and Tesla are really the only outliers at this point as far as I'm aware. Everyone else uses J1772 + Combo.
To be fair to said hi tax states, they're also the states that have the highest GDPs, and the highest tax takes. Trying to claim that the low-state-tax states are subsidising them is kinda crazy, when they contribute more to the tax pool than their population suggests they should.
Interesting, thanks for the info. That said, it seems somewhat backwards to me. If you wanted to remove one, the deduction on mortgage interest seems reasonable - the government isn't penalising you that money, you made a choice to pay it.
The state and local taxes on the other hand, by not having that deduction, causes people to be double-taxed, which is weird.
Of course, with my cynical hat on... if you wanted to penalise left leaning people, double-taxing people in states that pay high state and local taxes would be a good way to do it.
Middle class isn't a function purely of wage in the US, since income, and cost of living varies wildly across the country.
In the UK, someone earning £80,000 is pretty much going to be well off whether they're living in Dundee, or London - though they're going to be more well off in Dundee.
In the US, someone earning $150,000 will be very well off if they live in Birmingham, but be pretty badly off if they live in the SF bay area (which is likely, because that's where all the jobs that pay $150-300k are).
No it's not - if you earn income through capital gains, you get taxed at 15%. If you earn income through employment you get taxed at (up to) 35%.
Most of the people earning $150-300k will be living in a place like the SF bay area (because that's where the work that pays that much is), where their income is 12.5-25% of the median cost of a home.
No, this is a story about raising taxes on the middle class, and it's notably not a story about cutting them on the lower classes. It's a story about cutting them on the wealthy.
It's actually going to be more painful for those expensive areas like SF.
One of the proposals in Trump's tax plan is to drop the deductions for state and local taxes, and for mortgage interest. The areas where people earn $150-300k are usually the areas with high state and local taxes, and where houses cost a lot.
The solution is simple: just don't record in meeting minutes or any fashion whatsoever the things you don't want the public to know about.
That seems like a strange "solution"
What you're saying is "the way to avoid committing a crime, is to commit a crime".
The range needs to be infinity because they take too fucking long to recharge.
Why? Current EVs can charge at 24kW, giving them 100 miles of range per hour. ChargePoint's new DC chargers can charge at 100kW, giving vehicles 400 miles of range per hour. Humans sleep for at least 7 hours per 24, giving the vehicle a potential 2800 miles of range per sleep cycle, which is way above the distance they can drive in the other 17 hours.
Given that, it seems like there's an upper bound on the "what range is enough range" at 2800 miles. In practice, that upper bound is also way too high. In practice, humans really want to be able to drive continuously from 7am until 11am, eat lunch, drive continuously from 11:30am until 5pm, eat dinner, and drive continuously from 6pm until 9pm, and sleep, in even the most extreme examples.
In that example, we've got 4 hours of driving, at average 80mph (way higher than anyone realistically can actually average) = 320 miles. DC charge over lunch at Chargepoint's new rate gets them another 200 miles of range = 120 miles used. 5.5 hours at 80mph + 120 = 560 miles of range used. An hour of charging gets us back down to 160 miles of range used. Then 3 hours of driving at 80mph gets us back up to 400 miles of range used. The most drained the battery ever got in that journey was 560 miles, so we've established a lower upper bound here.
Any vehicle with 560 miles of range and Chargepoint's new 400A charging system is sufficient for all reasonable driving a human will do.
In practice, vehicles with 300 miles of range, and 100A charging are sufficient for 99.9% of the driving that people do. That 0.1% remaining can easily be filled by special purpose vehicles.
Because they have limited range
Irrelevant as long as the range is long enough.
take too long to charge
Also irrelevant as long as the range is long enough.
are boring to drive
That's not been true for many many years - every hypercar these days is going the electric route because they're *way* more fun to drive than petrol cars thanks to the instant torque.
Except most employment stats (at least the ones governments tout) don't include people who'd really like a full time position but have grabbed a part time job just to keep from losing everything.
The stat you're looking for is called underemployment, not unemployment.
Right, the real lie about unemployment figures is that they don't account for underemployment.
Sure, lots of people have jobs, but how many have an 8 hour contract, and are begging the company to let them come in and work minimum wage?
Yes - in other words, you pay more for the service that delivers it for you, and you only.
There's no denying that it's cheaper for the store to do it in the bulk-handling way, that doesn't mean that shipping is "free" though. They absolutely are charging more for the case where they deliver it to your door, just framing it as "have a discount if you don't want delivery to your door".
At least they're not quite as blatant as Walmart, who advertise free shipping, but offer you a $5 discount if you pick it up yourself.
Dear Afforementioned governments,
Do you even like it being possible for financial transactions to be made without massive massive massive amounts of fraud?
* jetsamed
It's a technical term on iOS meaning killed due to being in the background and there being a need for memory.