I suppose that would depend on your definition of "work."
If you accept that your power plants pump poison into the environment as a course of normal operation, then yeah most power plants work awesome. I'd hope that we'd go for "produce electricity without elevated cancer and respiratory disease rates for anyone that happens to be downwind" myself.
Dude. It does destroy ecosystems. See: the 80,000 acre area that is now "Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake" in Washington, created by the Grand Coulee Dam. Or the 54,000 acres that makes up the Lake of the Ozarks.
I'm pretty sure any land organism that lived in those areas previously would consider their habitat destroyed, what with it being underwater and completely unlivable for anything without gills.
The critical flaw with all these protests is that they fail to see that these companies and governments are going to move that oil one way or the other. By protesting against pipelines, they're just forcing these companies to move it with far less safe and reliable means, which means more spills and accidents per unit moved.
The oil will get moved in one way or another. Fighting all methods of transporting oil is about as useful as putting a Band-Aid on a bullet hole.
Jobs was far from the master of design and QA management that people keep trying to make him out to be these days. Yes, he was better than most and got more from his organization than many others, but he still had his travesties of customer support and design decisions:
"You're holding it wrong" Denying the cracks in the G4 cube case forever as lines left over from the injection mold process, when they would show up after the product was being used Releasing Final Cut Pro X when it couldn't even talk to Final Cut Server, causing all your pro shops that fully bought in to your solution to be screwed Etc.
I'm sure that Carmack signed agreements at some point that any novel technologies he developed while on the clock were owned by Zenimax. And even though the CEO claims "While we dislike litigation" which made me spit water all over my keyboard, they are no stranger to legal proceedings.
He should have known better, and now Facebook pays the price. If only both of them could have somehow lost.
Sure, I'll just start up my carbon sequestration plant where giant vents suck in air, and oil comes out a pipeline on the other side of the building, as well as depleted-CO2-air being exhausted back out. I already have hundreds of these giant superclean industrial facilities utilizing technology that doesn't exist built for free, and the only waste product is rainbows and happy panda bears that are more than willing to reproduce and repopulate the species!
While asking for solutions that don't exist and don't even have technology anywhere close to prototyping, why don't you just ask that world hunger and poverty should be solved tomorrow, and that everyone that wants one can get a pony too?
You know that the vast majority of the driving public doesn't have your wild edge-case requirements, right?
If it's not right for you, you aren't forced to buy it. However it's important to realize that the world does not actually revolve around you, and that current EV designs are more than adequate for most people's needs. I understand how you might be confused about the orbital motion of the earth with such a supermassive ego, but ego doesn't actually cause gravitational attraction.
It's almost like Samsung regularly cheats on benchmarks, lies in their advertisements, participates in price-fixing and collusion in order to screw customers, bribery of government officials, and blatant proven theft of intellectual property.
Who would have figured that they would continue this behavior, as any fines or punishments have been far less than the profits of continuing to do so?
My wife and I took a look at new phones because her company is going draconian with what they allow to happen on her company-provided phone, and the prices are outrageous.
I'll stick with my 2+ year old device, and we'll find her something on eBay or whatever if / when her company takes their smartphones back to the stone age of being glorified email devices.
I think it's an issue of scale - unless they go all-in, they'll never get the costs down.
Charging at home is a problem solved by EV sales volume rising - the more of them are out there, the more incentive people have for building charging infrastructure. Anyone who owns their home can install a charger - I did in an hour or so; anyone who rents (depending on the person / company you rent from) can request chargers to be installed adding a marketable amenity to their property. The more requests, the more likely the owner will do it.
Eventually the owners will have to, or their properties will become vacant as people move to homes that have owners that provide needed amenities.
Or, GM passenger cars are terrible and buyers go a different way.
Yes, there are more SUVs being sold. "Crossovers" are just tall station wagons on bigger tires. However, Toyota and Honda still sell a metric fuckload of Camrys, Corollas and Civics to the point of them being in the top 10 vehicles sold including SUVs and light-duty trucks like the Ford F-Series, Chevy Silverado, and Dodge Ram.
Clearly Toyota and Honda know something that eludes GM - like how to build a car that isn't a pile of shit after 40,000 miles.
Moving the goalposts each time you're shown to be wrong.
If someone is going to buy a new car, they are going to buy a new car regardless of your wishes of what they do with their resources. If they buy a Tesla (or any other EV) they will emit less carbon over the lifetime of the vehicle than if they buy an ICE-powered car. Thus, the EV is cleaner. QED.
Feel free to STFU now. The claim was "cleaner" which is true and supported by linked research and statistics, and you cannot argue that so you desperately try to talk about anything else, such as your completely made-up percentages about global income and affordability, with exactly zero evidence to back it up. All of it is a poor attempt at misdirection from the fact that you are wrong.
Using this independent emissions calculator with a Model 3 in a zip code where basically 100% of the electricity comes from coal (an East suburb of Cincinnati, Ohio), it is still producing 1/2 of the carbon emissions of the average ICE-powered vehicle. It's even more compelling if you are in a zip code with a more clean energy mix, such as Portland, Oregon. (less than 1/4 the emissions) The up-front carbon cost to manufacture will be higher than an ICE, but the far lower operating carbon output will cross over into net-savings within a year or two.
Are they completely clean transportation? Clearly, no; and nothing is - not even walking. But they are "cleaner" which is what my earlier statement said. And now I've provided independent sources to back that up, with their reasoning and research attached.
Please point out how I'm a "fanboy" from anything I've ever said about the man. It's true that there is plenty of kool-aid being splashed around, but I'm not drinking it.
I personally think he's a huge gaping asshole of a man who, like Jobs (another gaping orifice), managed to find themselves in a favorable environment to bring about needed change in an industry and took full advantage.
Being successful at something doesn't preclude someone being a giant fucking industrial-sized bag of douche, which there is more than ample evidence of.
Just because he doesn't have a mechanical engineering degree doesn't mean he can't have some aptitude and ask questions of the assumptions of those that do. And as long as the right questions are being asked of the right people, then things move forward. It definitely takes it's toll though - why do you think there's been such a revolving door in the executive offices? Collisions of ego show that, like traffic accidents, mass wins; and Musk's ego is bigger than all else.
Any engineer knows that talking with someone outside the field and explaining it will get your own brain working the problem again, and sometimes you come across different solutions. I know software engineers that keep a rubber duck on their desk to explain problems to just to be able to hear themselves going over it again for this purpose. It just so happens that this guy has the clout and authority to make the engineers explain rather than doing it voluntarily as a problem-solving technique.
Yeah, he's a micromanager. But he seems to get results. I personally would absolutely hate to work directly with the guy for the reasons you state, but that doesn't mean that it can't be effective.
Even crazy can be put to good use sometimes. He can rocket himself to Mars and die from radiation-induced cancers, but he's still moved the needle back here on Earth to make transportation cleaner.
That's because they are "compliance" cars - they only exist because of California regulations that require them to exist or pay money to competitors with credits to sell (such as Tesla).
Traditional auto makers and their network of dealerships make way too much money on maintenance for them to give up on internal combustion so quickly.
Slashdot Mirror
I suppose that would depend on your definition of "work."
If you accept that your power plants pump poison into the environment as a course of normal operation, then yeah most power plants work awesome. I'd hope that we'd go for "produce electricity without elevated cancer and respiratory disease rates for anyone that happens to be downwind" myself.
Dude. It does destroy ecosystems. See: the 80,000 acre area that is now "Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake" in Washington, created by the Grand Coulee Dam. Or the 54,000 acres that makes up the Lake of the Ozarks.
I'm pretty sure any land organism that lived in those areas previously would consider their habitat destroyed, what with it being underwater and completely unlivable for anything without gills.
The critical flaw with all these protests is that they fail to see that these companies and governments are going to move that oil one way or the other. By protesting against pipelines, they're just forcing these companies to move it with far less safe and reliable means, which means more spills and accidents per unit moved.
The oil will get moved in one way or another. Fighting all methods of transporting oil is about as useful as putting a Band-Aid on a bullet hole.
Your post would suggest that there was not any room made available, and the hate is very much still there.
Jobs was far from the master of design and QA management that people keep trying to make him out to be these days. Yes, he was better than most and got more from his organization than many others, but he still had his travesties of customer support and design decisions:
"You're holding it wrong"
Denying the cracks in the G4 cube case forever as lines left over from the injection mold process, when they would show up after the product was being used
Releasing Final Cut Pro X when it couldn't even talk to Final Cut Server, causing all your pro shops that fully bought in to your solution to be screwed
Etc.
I'm sure that Carmack signed agreements at some point that any novel technologies he developed while on the clock were owned by Zenimax. And even though the CEO claims "While we dislike litigation" which made me spit water all over my keyboard, they are no stranger to legal proceedings.
He should have known better, and now Facebook pays the price. If only both of them could have somehow lost.
Glad to see you're keeping an open, objective mind.
Sure, I'll just start up my carbon sequestration plant where giant vents suck in air, and oil comes out a pipeline on the other side of the building, as well as depleted-CO2-air being exhausted back out. I already have hundreds of these giant superclean industrial facilities utilizing technology that doesn't exist built for free, and the only waste product is rainbows and happy panda bears that are more than willing to reproduce and repopulate the species!
While asking for solutions that don't exist and don't even have technology anywhere close to prototyping, why don't you just ask that world hunger and poverty should be solved tomorrow, and that everyone that wants one can get a pony too?
You know that the vast majority of the driving public doesn't have your wild edge-case requirements, right?
If it's not right for you, you aren't forced to buy it. However it's important to realize that the world does not actually revolve around you, and that current EV designs are more than adequate for most people's needs. I understand how you might be confused about the orbital motion of the earth with such a supermassive ego, but ego doesn't actually cause gravitational attraction.
It's almost like Samsung regularly cheats on benchmarks, lies in their advertisements, participates in price-fixing and collusion in order to screw customers, bribery of government officials, and blatant proven theft of intellectual property.
Who would have figured that they would continue this behavior, as any fines or punishments have been far less than the profits of continuing to do so?
My wife and I took a look at new phones because her company is going draconian with what they allow to happen on her company-provided phone, and the prices are outrageous.
I'll stick with my 2+ year old device, and we'll find her something on eBay or whatever if / when her company takes their smartphones back to the stone age of being glorified email devices.
I think it's an issue of scale - unless they go all-in, they'll never get the costs down.
Charging at home is a problem solved by EV sales volume rising - the more of them are out there, the more incentive people have for building charging infrastructure. Anyone who owns their home can install a charger - I did in an hour or so; anyone who rents (depending on the person / company you rent from) can request chargers to be installed adding a marketable amenity to their property. The more requests, the more likely the owner will do it.
Eventually the owners will have to, or their properties will become vacant as people move to homes that have owners that provide needed amenities.
I'd rather people drive diesel SUVs than gasoline. Far better fuel economy.
Unfortunately they don't exist in the US.
Or, GM passenger cars are terrible and buyers go a different way.
Yes, there are more SUVs being sold. "Crossovers" are just tall station wagons on bigger tires. However, Toyota and Honda still sell a metric fuckload of Camrys, Corollas and Civics to the point of them being in the top 10 vehicles sold including SUVs and light-duty trucks like the Ford F-Series, Chevy Silverado, and Dodge Ram.
Clearly Toyota and Honda know something that eludes GM - like how to build a car that isn't a pile of shit after 40,000 miles.
Moving the goalposts each time you're shown to be wrong.
If someone is going to buy a new car, they are going to buy a new car regardless of your wishes of what they do with their resources. If they buy a Tesla (or any other EV) they will emit less carbon over the lifetime of the vehicle than if they buy an ICE-powered car. Thus, the EV is cleaner. QED.
Feel free to STFU now. The claim was "cleaner" which is true and supported by linked research and statistics, and you cannot argue that so you desperately try to talk about anything else, such as your completely made-up percentages about global income and affordability, with exactly zero evidence to back it up. All of it is a poor attempt at misdirection from the fact that you are wrong.
If you have decent estimates, and aren't preparing for that estimate to become reality, then you're setting yourself up for massive failure.
See: the entire argument around climate change.
False:
https://www.theguardian.com/fo...
https://slate.com/technology/2...
Using this independent emissions calculator with a Model 3 in a zip code where basically 100% of the electricity comes from coal (an East suburb of Cincinnati, Ohio), it is still producing 1/2 of the carbon emissions of the average ICE-powered vehicle. It's even more compelling if you are in a zip code with a more clean energy mix, such as Portland, Oregon. (less than 1/4 the emissions) The up-front carbon cost to manufacture will be higher than an ICE, but the far lower operating carbon output will cross over into net-savings within a year or two.
Are they completely clean transportation? Clearly, no; and nothing is - not even walking. But they are "cleaner" which is what my earlier statement said. And now I've provided independent sources to back that up, with their reasoning and research attached.
Go away, troll.
At one point US government employees actually designed the systems although the work was often outsourced to contractors.
although the work was often outsourced to contractors.
outsourced to contractors.
contractors
And who were those contractors? Jim's welding shop down the way, or big aerospace corporations?
Please point out how I'm a "fanboy" from anything I've ever said about the man. It's true that there is plenty of kool-aid being splashed around, but I'm not drinking it.
I personally think he's a huge gaping asshole of a man who, like Jobs (another gaping orifice), managed to find themselves in a favorable environment to bring about needed change in an industry and took full advantage.
Being successful at something doesn't preclude someone being a giant fucking industrial-sized bag of douche, which there is more than ample evidence of.
Just because he doesn't have a mechanical engineering degree doesn't mean he can't have some aptitude and ask questions of the assumptions of those that do. And as long as the right questions are being asked of the right people, then things move forward. It definitely takes it's toll though - why do you think there's been such a revolving door in the executive offices? Collisions of ego show that, like traffic accidents, mass wins; and Musk's ego is bigger than all else.
Any engineer knows that talking with someone outside the field and explaining it will get your own brain working the problem again, and sometimes you come across different solutions. I know software engineers that keep a rubber duck on their desk to explain problems to just to be able to hear themselves going over it again for this purpose. It just so happens that this guy has the clout and authority to make the engineers explain rather than doing it voluntarily as a problem-solving technique.
Yeah, he's a micromanager. But he seems to get results. I personally would absolutely hate to work directly with the guy for the reasons you state, but that doesn't mean that it can't be effective.
Even crazy can be put to good use sometimes. He can rocket himself to Mars and die from radiation-induced cancers, but he's still moved the needle back here on Earth to make transportation cleaner.
The point of his comment was to troll. That's what he does.
You almost had a point until the needless racism.
That's because they are "compliance" cars - they only exist because of California regulations that require them to exist or pay money to competitors with credits to sell (such as Tesla).
Traditional auto makers and their network of dealerships make way too much money on maintenance for them to give up on internal combustion so quickly.
I guess I'm wondering if they have less riders, then maybe service cuts are in order to reduce unused capacity?