And why haven't we seen the same story written about BMW / Mercedes / Acura / Jaguar / Audi / Infiniti / etc. - guess what; they all store data on the car too, because we fucking ask the car to do that so the data is accessible to use in the car without having to connect your phone or re-enter it every single time.
It's kind of designed to do that, and any high-end car with a connectivity and navigation package will keep basically all of this except maybe the video.
If people don't know to wipe a device that makes use of personal data before handing permanent ownership of it off by now, then they just aren't paying attention.
And somehow we only hear about it when it's Tesla. You don't think it's a hot piece being placed by vested interests, do you?
Other than changing the axis of the camera's focal length, allowing for much more room?
Hint: phones are much taller than they are deep, and all these manufacturers refuse to make phones thicker, which means a periscope design solves a lot of requirements issues.
And those situations are exactly why credit cards exist - access to credit without seeing a loan officer should you incur a large expense such as appliance failure or car repairs. So yes you will pay a few tens of dollars in interest, but practice some financial responsibility and actually pay it off and don't buy shit you don't need on it and it's a small convenience fee for access to instant credit.
Stop buying a new phone every year and put some god damn money into savings if you are so worried about unexpected expenses.
Hint: you only pay interest on ANY credit card if you maintain a balance on the account for more than one accrual period. Don't buy more than you can afford, or budget in the interest on a high priced purchase as the cost of credit access.
Who gives a shit what the card looks like? You could have the most awesome looking card in the universe but if the terms on the account suck I'm never using it.
Give me a low interest card with no fees (international or otherwise) and some perks like cash back, and then color it pink and purple with holographic glitter and Hello Kitty branding and I'll use it over a card that "looks good" and screws you with your pants on every transaction.
You were making a good point, and then you took a shot at Tesla for no reason. Tesla still has hundreds of thousands of customers, and products they sell, as well as real intellectual property, a factory, several offices, much real estate holdings for stores and service centers, and real revenue in the form of auto sales and energy generation, sales, equipment leasing, servicing contracts, etc.
Not even close to a ponzi scheme by your own god damn logic.
Now if you wanted to say that Tesla is overvalued, or is in a speculative bubble, that's completely fair. But referring to it as a ponzi scheme is hyperbolic at best, and detracts from your own argument.
Except that those corporations you name have real value behind the share price - actual revenue that is audited, plant, property, equipment, assets, patents, etc. In theory you could liquidate IBM and divide up the proceeds to the shareholders with a ratio according to how many shares each one owns and arrive at some number in the neighborhood of their market cap.
No such thing can be said about Bitcoin, because each coin only represents spent energy to "find" it with a massive mountain of speculative value on top - there's no actual real-world thing backing its value.
Here's how: 1. Stop buying Qualcomm products, replacing them with one of Qualcomm's competitors. 2. Stop paying Qualcomm for patent royalties, as they are no longer shipping Qualcomm's products.
Anybody that understands that all the planets aren't always in a single synchronized line could have inferred this - all the planets do not have the same orbital period, so there will always be a distribution around the Sun. This means that some of them may be on the opposite side of the Sun from us, and even though their average distance from the Sun is close to Earth's average distance from the Sun, they are not close to each other at that point in time.
I didn't know there was opportunity for publishing papers that spell out common sense and grade school two-dimensional geometry, though.
Yeah, because rivers the size of the Columbia freeze solid outside of a full-blown ice age.
If it were that cold for long enough for that to happen, basically everyone would already be dead or migrated elsewhere and there would be no need for the nuclear plant to operate.
If you're going to attack something, at least have an attack that survives the massive onslaught of common sense.
Yeah, that means you would need to have the nuclear plant close to a population center, which is something that most if not all population centers do not want.
It's not so much fuel cost, as grid stability. Wildly fluctuating sources of power can be a real problem, which is why grid operators actually limit the amount of installed wind and solar they allow in some regions.
Grand Coulee Dam is one of 14 hydroelectric dams on the Columbia River, not including tributary rivers such as the Snake, Willamette, Yakima, Deschutes, Cowlitz, and Lewis Rivers (as well as other smaller rivers) and generates 7,079 MW by itself. There's 9 other dams on the Columbia main stem as well, which produce over 26,500 MW in total.
The largest nuclear generating station in the United States is Palo Verde, which has an operational capacity of 3937 MW from three reactors.
Why do you have to lie in order to make your chosen solution look better?
This might come as a galloping shock, but industrial facilities like this have an actual maintenance schedule, and they build in windows of time for doing it that allow them to move that maintenance around based on demand.
This storm won't last forever, and if they have some maintenance to do, they can do it next week instead. Nothing is lost, but the grid stays stable during a time of higher demand.
It's almost like there are engineers somewhere that think about this shit.
You laugh, but there actually is infrastructure for doing that. The flow on the Pacific DC Grid Intertie can be reversed for exactly that purpose to send power from it's southern terminus in the Los Angeles area (Sylmar) back up to the BPA.
The monetary costs of the changes are fairly easy to calculate, as they are built by plussing up costs to build known infrastructure to replace coal.
The monetary costs of unpredictable and severe weather are not easy to calculate, as they are unpredictable and severe. And, what price tag do you put on lost lives due to unpredictable and severe weather, as well as elevated respiratory disease rates? Any number you put down makes you a total fucking douche bag because you are assigning arbitrary monetary value to people's lives.
There's also an argument to be made for "maybe we should generate cleaner power because we don't all want to live in a polluted shithole."
Of course not, those costs are externalized, and any attempt (at least in the US) to quantify those costs and add them to the ledger (cap and trade) has resulted in anti-environmental zeal from the Fox News types, even though it would actually do what they're constantly bleating on about: create a free market for dealing with pollution and allowing self-regulation of industry.
Slashdot Mirror
And why haven't we seen the same story written about BMW / Mercedes / Acura / Jaguar / Audi / Infiniti / etc. - guess what; they all store data on the car too, because we fucking ask the car to do that so the data is accessible to use in the car without having to connect your phone or re-enter it every single time.
It's kind of designed to do that, and any high-end car with a connectivity and navigation package will keep basically all of this except maybe the video.
If people don't know to wipe a device that makes use of personal data before handing permanent ownership of it off by now, then they just aren't paying attention.
And somehow we only hear about it when it's Tesla. You don't think it's a hot piece being placed by vested interests, do you?
Other than changing the axis of the camera's focal length, allowing for much more room?
Hint: phones are much taller than they are deep, and all these manufacturers refuse to make phones thicker, which means a periscope design solves a lot of requirements issues.
And those situations are exactly why credit cards exist - access to credit without seeing a loan officer should you incur a large expense such as appliance failure or car repairs. So yes you will pay a few tens of dollars in interest, but practice some financial responsibility and actually pay it off and don't buy shit you don't need on it and it's a small convenience fee for access to instant credit.
Stop buying a new phone every year and put some god damn money into savings if you are so worried about unexpected expenses.
Hint: you only pay interest on ANY credit card if you maintain a balance on the account for more than one accrual period. Don't buy more than you can afford, or budget in the interest on a high priced purchase as the cost of credit access.
That's how it works.
None of those things are a monopoly, as defined under federal law. And that's the only definition that matters.
Who gives a shit what the card looks like? You could have the most awesome looking card in the universe but if the terms on the account suck I'm never using it.
Give me a low interest card with no fees (international or otherwise) and some perks like cash back, and then color it pink and purple with holographic glitter and Hello Kitty branding and I'll use it over a card that "looks good" and screws you with your pants on every transaction.
You were making a good point, and then you took a shot at Tesla for no reason. Tesla still has hundreds of thousands of customers, and products they sell, as well as real intellectual property, a factory, several offices, much real estate holdings for stores and service centers, and real revenue in the form of auto sales and energy generation, sales, equipment leasing, servicing contracts, etc.
Not even close to a ponzi scheme by your own god damn logic.
Now if you wanted to say that Tesla is overvalued, or is in a speculative bubble, that's completely fair. But referring to it as a ponzi scheme is hyperbolic at best, and detracts from your own argument.
Except that those corporations you name have real value behind the share price - actual revenue that is audited, plant, property, equipment, assets, patents, etc. In theory you could liquidate IBM and divide up the proceeds to the shareholders with a ratio according to how many shares each one owns and arrive at some number in the neighborhood of their market cap.
No such thing can be said about Bitcoin, because each coin only represents spent energy to "find" it with a massive mountain of speculative value on top - there's no actual real-world thing backing its value.
c is already taken. Let's not confuse anything more than this discussion proves it already is.
so what leads you to conclude it's not possible for them to evolve what they have until it handles pretty much any case?
Hate and short positions.
Here's how:
1. Stop buying Qualcomm products, replacing them with one of Qualcomm's competitors.
2. Stop paying Qualcomm for patent royalties, as they are no longer shipping Qualcomm's products.
This isn't really that hard to suss out.
There's a chance they were looking to establish legal precedent, and if they would have won, it would have been a bargain at 5x the cost.
Anybody that understands that all the planets aren't always in a single synchronized line could have inferred this - all the planets do not have the same orbital period, so there will always be a distribution around the Sun. This means that some of them may be on the opposite side of the Sun from us, and even though their average distance from the Sun is close to Earth's average distance from the Sun, they are not close to each other at that point in time.
I didn't know there was opportunity for publishing papers that spell out common sense and grade school two-dimensional geometry, though.
So they used idle process in an already existing data center to actually calculate math, rather than just idle.
What the fuck is your problem again? This is exactly the kind of thing that is more efficient on cloud computing.
Yeah, because rivers the size of the Columbia freeze solid outside of a full-blown ice age.
If it were that cold for long enough for that to happen, basically everyone would already be dead or migrated elsewhere and there would be no need for the nuclear plant to operate.
If you're going to attack something, at least have an attack that survives the massive onslaught of common sense.
Yeah, that means you would need to have the nuclear plant close to a population center, which is something that most if not all population centers do not want.
It's not so much fuel cost, as grid stability. Wildly fluctuating sources of power can be a real problem, which is why grid operators actually limit the amount of installed wind and solar they allow in some regions.
False:
Grand Coulee Dam is one of 14 hydroelectric dams on the Columbia River, not including tributary rivers such as the Snake, Willamette, Yakima, Deschutes, Cowlitz, and Lewis Rivers (as well as other smaller rivers) and generates 7,079 MW by itself. There's 9 other dams on the Columbia main stem as well, which produce over 26,500 MW in total.
The largest nuclear generating station in the United States is Palo Verde, which has an operational capacity of 3937 MW from three reactors.
Why do you have to lie in order to make your chosen solution look better?
This might come as a galloping shock, but industrial facilities like this have an actual maintenance schedule, and they build in windows of time for doing it that allow them to move that maintenance around based on demand.
This storm won't last forever, and if they have some maintenance to do, they can do it next week instead. Nothing is lost, but the grid stays stable during a time of higher demand.
It's almost like there are engineers somewhere that think about this shit.
You laugh, but there actually is infrastructure for doing that. The flow on the Pacific DC Grid Intertie can be reversed for exactly that purpose to send power from it's southern terminus in the Los Angeles area (Sylmar) back up to the BPA.
Because nobody heats with electricity, right?
Never heard of thermoelectric heat pumps? Resistive heaters?
Plus it's not like Seattle sees a whole lot of snow to begin with, what with it's whopping 180 feet of elevation above sea level.
Yeah, because the States of New York and Pennsylvania were totally evacuated and deserted when Three Mile Island happened.
You know there are fail-safe measures on these things, right?
Your logic fails, and here's why:
The monetary costs of the changes are fairly easy to calculate, as they are built by plussing up costs to build known infrastructure to replace coal.
The monetary costs of unpredictable and severe weather are not easy to calculate, as they are unpredictable and severe. And, what price tag do you put on lost lives due to unpredictable and severe weather, as well as elevated respiratory disease rates? Any number you put down makes you a total fucking douche bag because you are assigning arbitrary monetary value to people's lives.
There's also an argument to be made for "maybe we should generate cleaner power because we don't all want to live in a polluted shithole."
Of course not, those costs are externalized, and any attempt (at least in the US) to quantify those costs and add them to the ledger (cap and trade) has resulted in anti-environmental zeal from the Fox News types, even though it would actually do what they're constantly bleating on about: create a free market for dealing with pollution and allowing self-regulation of industry.