And the only non-factual part of this post. Speculation: Tesla may be deliberately trying to slow down production, so they can push more of those preorders into later years when the ZEV mandated percentage is higher. They may be hoping that the other companies will have a harder time hitting the higher quota percentages, which would make Tesla's ZEV credits more valuable. Right now, once all the automakers hit their ZEV quotas, the ZEV credits for any additional cars Tesla sells that year are worthless.
Yeah, that's a bit of unpleasant economic reality I hadn't yet factored in, and would be par for the course for a business model that's been dependent on various streams of OPM from day 1.
As I've said before, the hundreds of thousands of people on the Model 3 waitlist means you can't view an increase in deliveries as an equivalent increase in customers. They're simply backfilling orders that already existed, so the 110% growth is just measuring increase in production. Depending on the rate that people on the waitlist are giving up and moving on, net customer demand could actually be decreasing.
The real test will come when the waitlist is eliminated -- then QoQ or YoY will actually measure deltas in customer demand.
Measles was eliminated in the United States in 2000.
I hear this meme a lot. The CDC reported 216 cases of measles in the U.S. from 2001-2003. Roughly 1 in 5 of those were of "unknown" origin (i.e., they couldn't find evidence to pin the case on an external source).
That's certainly a puzzling definition of "eliminated" -- it seems more along the lines of "Mission Accomplished" in Iraq than any sort of statistical reality.
1.45Gbps LTE requires 6-carrier aggregation. Qualcomm's 5G x50 modem has a theoretical peak of 5Gbps with 8 carriers, so the current 1Gpbs real-world performance is probably only dual-carrier. Plenty more headroom to exploit down the road.
I'm not at all shocked that went straight over your head. Posts like the one of yours I first responded to accomplish precisely nothing (other than garnering fawning mods from other people who apparently think sitting around repeatedly saying "we should just DOOOO something" [and by "we" you of course mean someone other than you] moves the ball forward).
If you truly believe we should all do as much as you possibly can, there's plenty you yourself could actually do, including minimizing your electricity usage by not wasting time online churning out useless posts. And hey -- that would also reduce the amount of electricity we all burn reading your angry missives. That's what they call a win-win.
All successful legislation has some sort of memorable/cute/catchy acronym. "CEA" just doesn't cut the mustard. Something like the Corporate Responsibility After Pwnage Act would have had a much better shot.
we, as a species, could could stop being pants-on-head stupid about this, get our collective fingers out of our collective ears, uncover our collective eyes, actually acknowledge this shit is happening and it's at least in part our fault, actually DO something about it. Just sayin'..
Spot on. For example, just think of the reductions "we" could achieve were "we" to cut back on banal moral preening on the internet.
The only other explanation I see is if absolutely no one is actually minding the store at a higher level and individual fiefdoms just roll out major policy changes like this without review or sanity check. Not entirely unbelievable for something that grew from a dorm room project to a half trillion dollar enterprise in 15 years.
But hopefully we're reaching the point where the reason doesn't (shouldn't) matter and people will figure out some other way to debate politics and share what they're having for dinner. Like talking, for example.
maybe they should just hire the workers as full-time employees, pay them what they apparently believe they should be paid, and give them the benefits they apparently believe they should receive.
Keeping the workers as contractors that Google can use as much or as little as they please, but forcing their actual employers to give them above-market pay and benefits regardless of how much time they actually spend on Google contracts, gives Google all the benefit (PR, goodwill) and very little of the risk.
(and the rigamarole of answering dumb questions like "...why do you need two laptops, Sir?")
I fly with two laptops regularly. I've never been asked to justify it. Nor have I ever heard the question posed to anyone around me.
but the 4th Amendment violations in the name of reassurance continue apace
If you let this sort of perspective bleed through while you're going through security, I'd gently suggest that just might be the reason you're getting extra attention.
How about dropping a couple of big chunks of concrete on the road, in the dead of night ? When you throw them from a pick-up truck
Now you're talking -- that sort of thing would be just as easy for any random person to pull off (because everyone has a pickup truck and is capable of slinging around chunks of concrete big enough to cause cars to swerve around them), would have exactly the same effect on cars and traffic (in that people would of course maintain speed while swerving around them and not return to their own lane afterward), and is just as hard for the average driver to detect and for the average good samaritan to remedy.
Completely agree that's a great approach when we have time to calmly and rationally think it through from the comfort of our armchairs, but in the trenches I'd expect that to break down in somewhat inverse proportion to the amount of reaction time available, experience of the driver, familiarity with the road, etc.
And that's for human drivers -- when we're debating whether it's ok to have this sort of behavior out of self-driving cars, we need to consider what can be expected to happen when the oncoming traffic is another self-driving car.
I found that it's super easy to make human drivers crash with a simple $5 laser.
Assuming you're not confessing to a crime, your speculative analogy is a poor one for several reasons, not the least of which is that in order to accurately and consistently distract the human driver with a laser, you're going to have to be sitting there pointing it at them rather than pasting some stickers on the pavement in the dead of night and being nowhere close when something bad happens. People's inclination toward malice/pranks/etc. tends to be inversely proportional to the odds of being caught/punished.
They even said, if there had been cars there, the Tesla likely would have noticed them and not blithely crashed head on.
Oh, that's nice. So my Tesla will just get duped into crossing over to the wrong side of the road, but will swerve back (in which direction?) when it eventually encounters traffic barreling toward it in what it wrongfully considers to be its lane, while the other cars will be in the process of taking evasive action (in which direction?) due to a car barreling toward them in THEIR lane.
What's a little stupid about it is that it's about as unhealthy as a regular burger. I was expecting it to be healthier, maybe have some fiber and less fat, but it's just slightly fewer calories and just as fatty.
Putting aside the fact that the "fat is BAD, mkay?" movement died a richly deserved death some time ago, Impossible's most recent recipe has 240 calories, 3 grams of fiber, and a lot less sodium than the original. It'll be interesting to see if they really were able to hold the line on flavor/texture/etc.
Harm no human unless an equivalent or greater harm comes to 2+ humans.
But the entire devil is in the details of how "equivalent or greater harm" gets calculated across a tremendous range of diverse scenarios on the continuum between life and death. To even take a crack at it is to load the algorithms with the value judgments of the programmers.
Slashdot Mirror
And the only non-factual part of this post. Speculation: Tesla may be deliberately trying to slow down production, so they can push more of those preorders into later years when the ZEV mandated percentage is higher. They may be hoping that the other companies will have a harder time hitting the higher quota percentages, which would make Tesla's ZEV credits more valuable. Right now, once all the automakers hit their ZEV quotas, the ZEV credits for any additional cars Tesla sells that year are worthless.
Yeah, that's a bit of unpleasant economic reality I hadn't yet factored in, and would be par for the course for a business model that's been dependent on various streams of OPM from day 1.
As I've said before, the hundreds of thousands of people on the Model 3 waitlist means you can't view an increase in deliveries as an equivalent increase in customers. They're simply backfilling orders that already existed, so the 110% growth is just measuring increase in production. Depending on the rate that people on the waitlist are giving up and moving on, net customer demand could actually be decreasing.
The real test will come when the waitlist is eliminated -- then QoQ or YoY will actually measure deltas in customer demand.
Measles was eliminated in the United States in 2000.
I hear this meme a lot. The CDC reported 216 cases of measles in the U.S. from 2001-2003. Roughly 1 in 5 of those were of "unknown" origin (i.e., they couldn't find evidence to pin the case on an external source).
That's certainly a puzzling definition of "eliminated" -- it seems more along the lines of "Mission Accomplished" in Iraq than any sort of statistical reality.
1.45Gbps LTE requires 6-carrier aggregation. Qualcomm's 5G x50 modem has a theoretical peak of 5Gbps with 8 carriers, so the current 1Gpbs real-world performance is probably only dual-carrier. Plenty more headroom to exploit down the road.
I'm not at all shocked that went straight over your head. Posts like the one of yours I first responded to accomplish precisely nothing (other than garnering fawning mods from other people who apparently think sitting around repeatedly saying "we should just DOOOO something" [and by "we" you of course mean someone other than you] moves the ball forward).
If you truly believe we should all do as much as you possibly can, there's plenty you yourself could actually do, including minimizing your electricity usage by not wasting time online churning out useless posts. And hey -- that would also reduce the amount of electricity we all burn reading your angry missives. That's what they call a win-win.
All successful legislation has some sort of memorable/cute/catchy acronym. "CEA" just doesn't cut the mustard. Something like the Corporate Responsibility After Pwnage Act would have had a much better shot.
Poe's law, in the e-flesh. Well played, sir.
we, as a species, could could stop being pants-on-head stupid about this, get our collective fingers out of our collective ears, uncover our collective eyes, actually acknowledge this shit is happening and it's at least in part our fault, actually DO something about it.
Just sayin'..
Spot on. For example, just think of the reductions "we" could achieve were "we" to cut back on banal moral preening on the internet.
Just sayin'...
*whoosh*
The only other explanation I see is if absolutely no one is actually minding the store at a higher level and individual fiefdoms just roll out major policy changes like this without review or sanity check. Not entirely unbelievable for something that grew from a dorm room project to a half trillion dollar enterprise in 15 years.
But hopefully we're reaching the point where the reason doesn't (shouldn't) matter and people will figure out some other way to debate politics and share what they're having for dinner. Like talking, for example.
Oh, wait....
maybe they should just hire the workers as full-time employees, pay them what they apparently believe they should be paid, and give them the benefits they apparently believe they should receive.
Keeping the workers as contractors that Google can use as much or as little as they please, but forcing their actual employers to give them above-market pay and benefits regardless of how much time they actually spend on Google contracts, gives Google all the benefit (PR, goodwill) and very little of the risk.
(and the rigamarole of answering dumb questions like "...why do you need two laptops, Sir?")
I fly with two laptops regularly. I've never been asked to justify it. Nor have I ever heard the question posed to anyone around me.
but the 4th Amendment violations in the name of reassurance continue apace
If you let this sort of perspective bleed through while you're going through security, I'd gently suggest that just might be the reason you're getting extra attention.
Redundant? Really? If that's the best fit you reflexive Tesla apologist mods can find, maybe it's a sign you're trying too hard.
How about dropping a couple of big chunks of concrete on the road, in the dead of night ? When you throw them from a pick-up truck
Now you're talking -- that sort of thing would be just as easy for any random person to pull off (because everyone has a pickup truck and is capable of slinging around chunks of concrete big enough to cause cars to swerve around them), would have exactly the same effect on cars and traffic (in that people would of course maintain speed while swerving around them and not return to their own lane afterward), and is just as hard for the average driver to detect and for the average good samaritan to remedy.
Completely agree that's a great approach when we have time to calmly and rationally think it through from the comfort of our armchairs, but in the trenches I'd expect that to break down in somewhat inverse proportion to the amount of reaction time available, experience of the driver, familiarity with the road, etc.
And that's for human drivers -- when we're debating whether it's ok to have this sort of behavior out of self-driving cars, we need to consider what can be expected to happen when the oncoming traffic is another self-driving car.
I found that it's super easy to make human drivers crash with a simple $5 laser.
Assuming you're not confessing to a crime, your speculative analogy is a poor one for several reasons, not the least of which is that in order to accurately and consistently distract the human driver with a laser, you're going to have to be sitting there pointing it at them rather than pasting some stickers on the pavement in the dead of night and being nowhere close when something bad happens. People's inclination toward malice/pranks/etc. tends to be inversely proportional to the odds of being caught/punished.
They even said, if there had been cars there, the Tesla likely would have noticed them and not blithely crashed head on.
Oh, that's nice. So my Tesla will just get duped into crossing over to the wrong side of the road, but will swerve back (in which direction?) when it eventually encounters traffic barreling toward it in what it wrongfully considers to be its lane, while the other cars will be in the process of taking evasive action (in which direction?) due to a car barreling toward them in THEIR lane.
Yeah, no problem whatsoever.
What's a little stupid about it is that it's about as unhealthy as a regular burger. I was expecting it to be healthier, maybe have some fiber and less fat, but it's just slightly fewer calories and just as fatty.
Putting aside the fact that the "fat is BAD, mkay?" movement died a richly deserved death some time ago, Impossible's most recent recipe has 240 calories, 3 grams of fiber, and a lot less sodium than the original. It'll be interesting to see if they really were able to hold the line on flavor/texture/etc.
In all fairness, White Castle has been serving "meat" for decades.
Seriously, is there nothing of real value to read, think, and talk about anymore?
Whether that's time to discharge or time to replacement is left to the imagination of the reader.
Because politics: Warren is generally weak amongst farmers and needs to signal to them specifically.
Now when I lay in bed awake at night, I can fret in so much more precise detail about what my body isn't doing...
Harm no human unless an equivalent or greater harm comes to 2+ humans.
But the entire devil is in the details of how "equivalent or greater harm" gets calculated across a tremendous range of diverse scenarios on the continuum between life and death. To even take a crack at it is to load the algorithms with the value judgments of the programmers.