Except if there's actually a sale (even pre-sale money exchange) then there's a chance of getting a refund.
Go ahead and try to get a refund for this, or any number of other kickstarter failures. I won't hold my breath. There's a reason why the product you get back is always referred to as a "reward" or "gift" - so there's no language anywhere that can be referred to by people wanting their money back post-failure.
There's another much simpler, and far less convoluted way that we arrived in the present:
The Hillary campaign bungled what should have been an easy win by completely ignoring what they thought were 'safe' states in the upper midwest, to their own peril. Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio. And that's the ball game.
Don't attribute to conspiracy what is adequately explained by sheer incompetence and an incredibly flawed candidate.
Your first fact: manufacturing a ICE car produces a shit ton of CO2, and then requires drilling for, extracting, refining, shipping, pumping and burning oil to operate it, producing a shit ton of CO2 for every single mile driven. And, keeping the car in operating order produces a shit ton of CO2 for the engine oil, transmission fluid, brake fluid, etc. which EVs largely don't have.
Once the EV has been created, the carbon footprint is minimal, especially if charged with solar power. Your precious IC car will be coughing out ever-more pollutants until the day it gets scrapped. Oh, but because there's still any carbon output, we shouldn't even try until we have a perfect solution, right?
That's how progress stops - letting "perfect" be the enemy of "measurably better," and you're kind of stupid for suggesting that.
And how is spending energy to grow / irrigate a plant, spending energy to harvest a plant, spending energy to refine the harvested plant product into ethanol where by definition you will have less than 100% of the plant, spending energy to transport said ethanol through a distribution network, spending energy to pump it into cars where it is finally burned for energy going to be "carbon negative" ? Sure, what isn't turned into ethanol will probably be used for biomass generation, but there's loss at every step of the way. Plus, good luck getting past the agribusiness lobby who just loves cashing those Ethanol subsidy checks to grow corn and make basically no difference whatsoever.
Oh, but all we have to do is navigate the political minefield that torpedoes Presidential campaigns before they even start if you are a US Senator and have ever voted against Ethanol subsidies, irrigate the deserts with infrastructure that doesn't exist, and make sure that infrastructure won't be destroyed by salt water over the next 10 years. No problem.
By the way, does this magic plant defy physics and exhibits the ability to output orders of magnitude more energy than it takes in to grow? Is this plant the catalyst needed to finally have room-temperature fusion power?
I don't think "fact" means what you think it means.
You guessed correctly - Toyota took out any equipment that they could reuse somewhere else - why the hell wouldn't they? They already owned it. They then liquidated the property and whatever was left.
It's hilarious that you keep arguing with these idiots using facts.
They clearly don't care about facts, or they wouldn't make the ridiculous arguments to begin with. What do you mean that you need to completely change an assembly line and all of it's tools when you start making a completely different vehicle that doesn't reuse any of the parts, and all the assembly machinery was sold?
It may have still been on paper, but that practice was not followed for years. Now the code of conduct is more aligned with what the organization actually does.
Because ZTE uses American technology, under license, in order to make their shit? Because Google is an American company, which gets a taste of app purchases through the Google Play store, made from ZTE devices? Because the Qualcomm processor and radio inside each ZTE device was manufactured for and sold by an American company to ZTE?
Do you think that ZTE grows it's phones on trees, or that there might be a logistics operation behind sourcing their parts, and licensing software and technology - of which a good slice goes to American corporations, which dodge^H^H^H^H^H pay American taxes, and create jobs.
Also, probably because someone told Trump that if he keeps fucking over China with his trade war horseshit, China is in a pretty good position to economically anal rape him and make sure he's a 1-termer. Some tariffs are expected, and just the cost of doing business - China factored that in long ago and was probably surprised it hasn't happened until now. But setting one off underneath one of their biggest electronics companies and essentially forcing them to shut down - that's too far and would result in very ugly retaliation that doesn't play well with the narrative he's trying to build - that he's a 'dealmaker' who is the only one that can make good deals and put these other countries where they belong.
China closes up and starts turning American goods away at the harbor and all that turns into the rankest horseshit you've ever smelled, even to his blissfully ignorant base.
The good news is that there is already underground infrastructure in LA, as well as Tokyo, and other earthquake-prone cities. There's a chance that there is already some structural engineering expertise with this kind of thing available.
Yes I would like a Tesla, which is why my fiance and I still have one on order.
Nothing you said is in any way convincing of anything, as they're all dominos in a line. Yes, the driver should still pay attention with Autopilot turned on. It's not a fully autonomous vehicle, and it requires you to give it steering input periodically to keep the system active. The safety equipment on the concrete divider was missing or already damaged, which increased the severity of damage from the wreck caused by the driver not paying attention as required. That equipment would not have prevented the collision, but it would have absorbed a significant amount of energy from it - that's why they're put on exposed concrete dividers to begin with. The extreme damage from the collision with the unprotected concrete divider, combined with a negligent driver not paying any attention and using a system outside of what its designers explicitly deem to be safe, caused enough damage to the battery pack that it's still catching fire.
The Autopilot failure is probably Tesla's fault, especially since you can find YouTube video of someone else replicating the circumstances on a highway with an exposed divider and faded pavement markings. But this is exactly why they require you to still pay attention when using Autopilot - it's not perfect and nobody is claiming it is. If he's paying attention, he has plenty of time to stop or swerve away from the concrete divider and none of the other dominos fall. Instead, the driver is paying attention to whatever the fuck else he thought was more important than hurtling down a freeway at 70 mph, and hits a concrete divider that has no crash protection, and the battery pack casing gets compromised by being crushed against reinforced concrete at 70 mph, and due to being compromised in ways that couldn't be protected against unless you're designing it for safe re-entry from orbit, it catch fire multiple times.
But somehow this is all on Tesla, and the poor negligent driver was a victim of the big bad evil corporation. Good job at failing logic.
We all know that brake hydraulic lines never corrode and fail, vomiting poisonous chemicals all over the road, right when you're building pressure in the lines (e.g. braking). And parking brake cables never get water into their jacket, rusting the cable - weakening it's tensile strength and causing it to expand in the jacket freezing it in place through friction - causing the cable to snap the next time you try to use the handbrake. - I've personally had that happen on three different vehicles from three different manufacturers. Oh, and some parking brake systems are a cable that runs to the rear brake calipers to manually add pressure to the brake piston - if you have no hydraulic pressure in the line, the parking brake is useless as well - VW did this on about 11 years worth of Jettas, Golfs, Cabrios; it's a common failure.
Your simple mechanical systems aren't as foolproof as you think.
You're making an assumption with zero data available to back it up.
The linked story was a picture of the rear end of a Tesla sticking out of a Starbucks. There was no accompanying text (at the time of me writing this) other than the factual statement that someone parked their Tesla inside of a Starbucks. So you assumed that someone activated Autopilot and it drove into a building straight away, rather than someone selected the wrong gear and absent-mindedly stabbed the accelerator, which happens all the damn time for some reason regardless of the badge on the car.
Someone does this in an Audi and it would barely make Facebook. But because it's a Tesla it will be national news. Yeah, and there's no press bias at all.
It's precious that you think the ISPs aren't collecting, indexing, and selling to the highest bidder any and all metadata they can harvest about what you are passing through their network.
Your argument is completely invalidated by the fact that the ISPs are not only doing exactly what Google / Facebook are doing (less now that HTTPS is in use everywhere, but they can still get metadata), they are making you pay them for the privilege and then asking for more.
But everyone having a windmill creating low frequency vibrations is fantastic for neighborhoods? And we all know that the wind blows sufficient to create power 100% of the time so you don't have to get a "super-complex grid-power-when-air-is-calm tie in", and there's a massive abundancy of companies making residential wind power equipment. And, because wind power doesn't have moving parts, there's never any maintenance that has to be done many feet off the ground.
All of your arguments are nonsense, and apply equally if not more so to wind power in a residential context.
Just to be clear, in case you couldn't get the dripping sarcasm:
- there are no possible health effects from the daily operation of solar power. - everyone knows when the sun is going to go down, so the grid-tie usage is far more predictable than wind. - solar has no moving parts, so the maintenance is cleaning them off every once in a while, on a roof you should already be inspecting regularly.
And across that 30-year time period, how much money will you not be giving to the grid operator for excited electrons? Please look at both sides of the equation.
How do you get on your roof for any other maintenance tasks you should do? Get an extension ladder.
And do you think that the companies that manufacture these things have never heard of hail? Unless you're buying the ultra-cheap garbage they can withstand a storm as long as you aren't getting golf ball sized hail, in which case you have homeowners insurance and you're likely making a claim for other storm damage anyway.
Any more FUD you want to spread around that is quite easily taken care of with about 3 seconds of thought?
What would be interesting is if a veto changes enough Congress-critters opinions to override. If there's one thing the House and Senate can agree on in a bi-partisan way, it's that they don't like when the will of the Congress is stymied by one obstinate guy a few blocks down Pennsylvania Ave.
By the way, this would be his first veto - a veto on an issue that has greater than 80% support across party lines. That being said, it's not an issue that actually drives people to change votes the way others do, such as the Affordable Care Act, abortion, federal budget spending, etc.
Actually it's incredibly different. A Net Neutrality continuance is something that is overwhelmingly approved by the public, across party lines. However, it's not an issue that actually gets anyone other than the most fervent advocates to actually support, or reject, a candidate.
In contrast, ACA repeal votes were highly partisan and thus not as well supported throughout the electorate, but was an issue that people cared enough about to cause candidates to earn / lose votes.
There's more than one dimension to most political issues, which is why pollsters not only ask if you support an issue, but also ask how likely a stance on that issue is to change your vote towards a candidate / party. Example: lots of people care about flag burning too, but a very small quantity of voters make a decision based on if a candidate supports / rejects a constitutional amendment against flag burning.
Slashdot Mirror
Except if there's actually a sale (even pre-sale money exchange) then there's a chance of getting a refund.
Go ahead and try to get a refund for this, or any number of other kickstarter failures. I won't hold my breath. There's a reason why the product you get back is always referred to as a "reward" or "gift" - so there's no language anywhere that can be referred to by people wanting their money back post-failure.
Likely for HTML emails. And yes, that's still stupid.
There's another much simpler, and far less convoluted way that we arrived in the present:
The Hillary campaign bungled what should have been an easy win by completely ignoring what they thought were 'safe' states in the upper midwest, to their own peril. Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio. And that's the ball game.
Don't attribute to conspiracy what is adequately explained by sheer incompetence and an incredibly flawed candidate.
You are part of the problem.
Ad hominem attack based on the geographical location where one lives has no place in informed debate. Stop posting forever.
Or you completely missed the point. Let me give you a clue, as you appear to be without one: you don't have to be the biggest to still be successful.
Your first fact: manufacturing a ICE car produces a shit ton of CO2, and then requires drilling for, extracting, refining, shipping, pumping and burning oil to operate it, producing a shit ton of CO2 for every single mile driven. And, keeping the car in operating order produces a shit ton of CO2 for the engine oil, transmission fluid, brake fluid, etc. which EVs largely don't have.
Once the EV has been created, the carbon footprint is minimal, especially if charged with solar power. Your precious IC car will be coughing out ever-more pollutants until the day it gets scrapped. Oh, but because there's still any carbon output, we shouldn't even try until we have a perfect solution, right?
That's how progress stops - letting "perfect" be the enemy of "measurably better," and you're kind of stupid for suggesting that.
And how is spending energy to grow / irrigate a plant, spending energy to harvest a plant, spending energy to refine the harvested plant product into ethanol where by definition you will have less than 100% of the plant, spending energy to transport said ethanol through a distribution network, spending energy to pump it into cars where it is finally burned for energy going to be "carbon negative" ? Sure, what isn't turned into ethanol will probably be used for biomass generation, but there's loss at every step of the way. Plus, good luck getting past the agribusiness lobby who just loves cashing those Ethanol subsidy checks to grow corn and make basically no difference whatsoever.
Oh, but all we have to do is navigate the political minefield that torpedoes Presidential campaigns before they even start if you are a US Senator and have ever voted against Ethanol subsidies, irrigate the deserts with infrastructure that doesn't exist, and make sure that infrastructure won't be destroyed by salt water over the next 10 years. No problem.
By the way, does this magic plant defy physics and exhibits the ability to output orders of magnitude more energy than it takes in to grow? Is this plant the catalyst needed to finally have room-temperature fusion power?
I don't think "fact" means what you think it means.
You guessed correctly - Toyota took out any equipment that they could reuse somewhere else - why the hell wouldn't they? They already owned it.
They then liquidated the property and whatever was left.
Don't be an idiot.
It's hilarious that you keep arguing with these idiots using facts.
They clearly don't care about facts, or they wouldn't make the ridiculous arguments to begin with. What do you mean that you need to completely change an assembly line and all of it's tools when you start making a completely different vehicle that doesn't reuse any of the parts, and all the assembly machinery was sold?
So your contention is that if you aren't instantly Toyota, you may as well close your doors and give up?
BMW and Mercedes apparently never got that memo, and they're doing just fine.
Don't be a god damn idiot.
If both President and VP go down, then the Speaker of the House becomes President. Then Senate President Pro Tempore.
This leaves us with Paul Ryan and then Orrin Hatch.
It may have still been on paper, but that practice was not followed for years. Now the code of conduct is more aligned with what the organization actually does.
The tail wagging the dog, so to speak.
Short on the way down, go long at the bottom. It's the insider trading / market manipulator way.
Because ZTE uses American technology, under license, in order to make their shit? Because Google is an American company, which gets a taste of app purchases through the Google Play store, made from ZTE devices? Because the Qualcomm processor and radio inside each ZTE device was manufactured for and sold by an American company to ZTE?
Do you think that ZTE grows it's phones on trees, or that there might be a logistics operation behind sourcing their parts, and licensing software and technology - of which a good slice goes to American corporations, which dodge^H^H^H^H^H pay American taxes, and create jobs.
Also, probably because someone told Trump that if he keeps fucking over China with his trade war horseshit, China is in a pretty good position to economically anal rape him and make sure he's a 1-termer. Some tariffs are expected, and just the cost of doing business - China factored that in long ago and was probably surprised it hasn't happened until now. But setting one off underneath one of their biggest electronics companies and essentially forcing them to shut down - that's too far and would result in very ugly retaliation that doesn't play well with the narrative he's trying to build - that he's a 'dealmaker' who is the only one that can make good deals and put these other countries where they belong.
China closes up and starts turning American goods away at the harbor and all that turns into the rankest horseshit you've ever smelled, even to his blissfully ignorant base.
Orbital/ATK and ULA went out of business? Damn, that's hard times for Boeing and Lockheed Martin...
Oh, no, you're just wrong about everything you said.
The good news is that there is already underground infrastructure in LA, as well as Tokyo, and other earthquake-prone cities. There's a chance that there is already some structural engineering expertise with this kind of thing available.
Yes I would like a Tesla, which is why my fiance and I still have one on order.
Nothing you said is in any way convincing of anything, as they're all dominos in a line. Yes, the driver should still pay attention with Autopilot turned on. It's not a fully autonomous vehicle, and it requires you to give it steering input periodically to keep the system active. The safety equipment on the concrete divider was missing or already damaged, which increased the severity of damage from the wreck caused by the driver not paying attention as required. That equipment would not have prevented the collision, but it would have absorbed a significant amount of energy from it - that's why they're put on exposed concrete dividers to begin with. The extreme damage from the collision with the unprotected concrete divider, combined with a negligent driver not paying any attention and using a system outside of what its designers explicitly deem to be safe, caused enough damage to the battery pack that it's still catching fire.
The Autopilot failure is probably Tesla's fault, especially since you can find YouTube video of someone else replicating the circumstances on a highway with an exposed divider and faded pavement markings. But this is exactly why they require you to still pay attention when using Autopilot - it's not perfect and nobody is claiming it is. If he's paying attention, he has plenty of time to stop or swerve away from the concrete divider and none of the other dominos fall. Instead, the driver is paying attention to whatever the fuck else he thought was more important than hurtling down a freeway at 70 mph, and hits a concrete divider that has no crash protection, and the battery pack casing gets compromised by being crushed against reinforced concrete at 70 mph, and due to being compromised in ways that couldn't be protected against unless you're designing it for safe re-entry from orbit, it catch fire multiple times.
But somehow this is all on Tesla, and the poor negligent driver was a victim of the big bad evil corporation. Good job at failing logic.
We all know that brake hydraulic lines never corrode and fail, vomiting poisonous chemicals all over the road, right when you're building pressure in the lines (e.g. braking). And parking brake cables never get water into their jacket, rusting the cable - weakening it's tensile strength and causing it to expand in the jacket freezing it in place through friction - causing the cable to snap the next time you try to use the handbrake. - I've personally had that happen on three different vehicles from three different manufacturers. Oh, and some parking brake systems are a cable that runs to the rear brake calipers to manually add pressure to the brake piston - if you have no hydraulic pressure in the line, the parking brake is useless as well - VW did this on about 11 years worth of Jettas, Golfs, Cabrios; it's a common failure.
Your simple mechanical systems aren't as foolproof as you think.
You're making an assumption with zero data available to back it up.
The linked story was a picture of the rear end of a Tesla sticking out of a Starbucks. There was no accompanying text (at the time of me writing this) other than the factual statement that someone parked their Tesla inside of a Starbucks. So you assumed that someone activated Autopilot and it drove into a building straight away, rather than someone selected the wrong gear and absent-mindedly stabbed the accelerator, which happens all the damn time for some reason regardless of the badge on the car.
Someone does this in an Audi and it would barely make Facebook. But because it's a Tesla it will be national news. Yeah, and there's no press bias at all.
It's precious that you think the ISPs aren't collecting, indexing, and selling to the highest bidder any and all metadata they can harvest about what you are passing through their network.
Your argument is completely invalidated by the fact that the ISPs are not only doing exactly what Google / Facebook are doing (less now that HTTPS is in use everywhere, but they can still get metadata), they are making you pay them for the privilege and then asking for more.
But everyone having a windmill creating low frequency vibrations is fantastic for neighborhoods? And we all know that the wind blows sufficient to create power 100% of the time so you don't have to get a "super-complex grid-power-when-air-is-calm tie in", and there's a massive abundancy of companies making residential wind power equipment. And, because wind power doesn't have moving parts, there's never any maintenance that has to be done many feet off the ground.
All of your arguments are nonsense, and apply equally if not more so to wind power in a residential context.
Just to be clear, in case you couldn't get the dripping sarcasm:
- there are no possible health effects from the daily operation of solar power.
- everyone knows when the sun is going to go down, so the grid-tie usage is far more predictable than wind.
- solar has no moving parts, so the maintenance is cleaning them off every once in a while, on a roof you should already be inspecting regularly.
And across that 30-year time period, how much money will you not be giving to the grid operator for excited electrons? Please look at both sides of the equation.
How do you get on your roof for any other maintenance tasks you should do? Get an extension ladder.
And do you think that the companies that manufacture these things have never heard of hail? Unless you're buying the ultra-cheap garbage they can withstand a storm as long as you aren't getting golf ball sized hail, in which case you have homeowners insurance and you're likely making a claim for other storm damage anyway.
Any more FUD you want to spread around that is quite easily taken care of with about 3 seconds of thought?
So buy a house that already exists?
This is for new construction only.
What would be interesting is if a veto changes enough Congress-critters opinions to override. If there's one thing the House and Senate can agree on in a bi-partisan way, it's that they don't like when the will of the Congress is stymied by one obstinate guy a few blocks down Pennsylvania Ave.
By the way, this would be his first veto - a veto on an issue that has greater than 80% support across party lines. That being said, it's not an issue that actually drives people to change votes the way others do, such as the Affordable Care Act, abortion, federal budget spending, etc.
Actually it's incredibly different. A Net Neutrality continuance is something that is overwhelmingly approved by the public, across party lines. However, it's not an issue that actually gets anyone other than the most fervent advocates to actually support, or reject, a candidate.
In contrast, ACA repeal votes were highly partisan and thus not as well supported throughout the electorate, but was an issue that people cared enough about to cause candidates to earn / lose votes.
There's more than one dimension to most political issues, which is why pollsters not only ask if you support an issue, but also ask how likely a stance on that issue is to change your vote towards a candidate / party. Example: lots of people care about flag burning too, but a very small quantity of voters make a decision based on if a candidate supports / rejects a constitutional amendment against flag burning.