A future government could repeal it or change the data, but there's no reason to suppose they would. This change to EVs is going to happen, and 2030 is not an unrealistic date for cutting off the obsolete ICE car models.
The Model 3 is nice, except for the brain dead idea to do away with all the usual buttons and manual controls in a normal car, and require the use of a tabbed touch screen to access the functions. It means that the driver needs to take their eyes off the road to do things.
Other than that I'd love a Model 3. But as it's the case, when I come to buy an EV, it'll be something else. Maybe an Ioniq or a 2018 Leaf.
Your post shows complete ignorance of the market. The big traditional car companies have been resisting EVs up until the last year. Where California have been forcing them to make a percentage of zero emission vehicles with legislation, they have produced "compliance cars" - EVs that they only sell in California, and only manufacture enough to comply with the law.
It's only now with the success of Tesla that EVs are taking off.
Nope, the legislation is being forced on the car companies, not requested by them.
Remember that they need to be called by an app, so the car company knows who's in them, and there will be cameras. If the person after you complains about a problem, they look at the previous journey(s), catch the culprit and charge them for the clean or ban them.
Meanwhile the person that complains can wait for another car.
Taxis work, even without the facility for banning people. There's no reason these couldn't work with that ability.
He didn't concede anything. He's absolutely right that there are many transportation options, and the ones you use in 13 years time will differ from now. The most obvious is that you buy an electric car, and simply charge it up at a public charger. But there are several more.
You sound like you don't actually use a car that much. Just to work and back. So a 200-300 mile range car would probably go for days between you needing to recharge it. And you're looking at about 30-45 minutes for an 80% charge at a supercharger.
And that's today. By 2025 or 2030 or 2040 when the bans come in in various countries, ranges will have gone up and charge times for a given distance down.
They are starting to put superchargers in petrol stations now, along with cafe areas whilst you wait that half an hour.
Another option for people like you will be cars as a service. Order a car, just like an Uber, and it'll drive you to work. Only no driver needed as it'll be fully autonomous. Parking and charging are not your problem.
Then again, if you own your own autonomous car, then you could tell it to go to a public charger and charge itself without your needing to go with it.
Because as you will see here and on other forums, there are some people that will simply refuse to move on from gas to electricity, no matter what. Idiots that won't accept the reality of global warming, and are simply incapable of change. The option to buy ICE cars simply needs to be taken away,
But the rate the computers are catching up is staggering. Computers consistently beating even the most skilled people progressing from Tic-Tac-Toe -> Chess -> Go took about 50 years.
(Of course he perfect play on Tic-Tac-Toe only means drawing if you are second to play.)
A website experience would be poor vs a native app. It would likely be lacking in features, as there are things you can't do with a web site. And it would prevent using the Apple Watch.
iPhone users want the Uber app. And there's no reason to stop them. They had a good reason to use an entitlement at the time, and now they don't need it any more they'll be removing it.
Flex is Uber for deliveries. Gig economy work for individuals with their own vehicles (usually cars) hired in blocks of time (currently 4 hours) using an app. In fact many of the drivers are Uber drivers diversifying their income. They drive Uber most of the time, but do a block of Amazon Flex deliveries when they can get a block.
As you know if you really do use Uber, when you enter the details of your trip, you are shown estimates for each of the cab types (UberX, UberExec).
ALWAYS.
Surges happen when the roads are at their busiest, so estimates are much harder. And so on the screen yuo mention it shows the minimum fare - what it will be if congestion is not too bad. Plus the price per mile/minute info.
And now you are wining about being shown the price per mile and per minute. But in a previous comment you were praising black cabs for the fact that they displayed the price per mile and per minute on the cab. Which shows you are not being objective here.
Even then, get rid of them. Even if you have to suppress them individually after checking with a #pragma to get a clear build. Because if you get into a habit of ignoring warnings with each build, you won't notice new warnings when they appear.
Backwards compatibility is a good thing. But it's not the only thing. It's balanced against improving the language for the better. There's a balance to be made.
But this isn't about why the thread started, it's about this particular comment you made: "Language design is an old, old problem. Parameter ordering consistency is also a well known, old old problem. If you can't get it right the first time, then you have no business designing a language."
Apple hasn't been reordering their parameters, and "you have no business designing a language." Is just ridiculous. Swift is a fantastic language and gets better with each release.
If all you are doing is writing drivers or embedded stuff, then C will serve you fine. But be clear about the fact that your preference is suitable for your niche, and most people are not in that niche.
C is not a good general purpose programming language any more.
Because you are trusting. Because you are in a hurry. Because you can't be bothered. Habit. There are any number of reasons most people don't ask how much they owe till the end of the journey.
Yes, I'm an iOS developer. Have been since 2008, and a developer in general since the 1980s. Seriously, always fix your errors then your warnings before you do anything else. Anything else will bite you in the arse.
Slashdot Mirror
A future government could repeal it or change the data, but there's no reason to suppose they would. This change to EVs is going to happen, and 2030 is not an unrealistic date for cutting off the obsolete ICE car models.
The Model 3 is nice, except for the brain dead idea to do away with all the usual buttons and manual controls in a normal car, and require the use of a tabbed touch screen to access the functions. It means that the driver needs to take their eyes off the road to do things.
Other than that I'd love a Model 3. But as it's the case, when I come to buy an EV, it'll be something else. Maybe an Ioniq or a 2018 Leaf.
Your post shows complete ignorance of the market. The big traditional car companies have been resisting EVs up until the last year. Where California have been forcing them to make a percentage of zero emission vehicles with legislation, they have produced "compliance cars" - EVs that they only sell in California, and only manufacture enough to comply with the law.
It's only now with the success of Tesla that EVs are taking off.
Nope, the legislation is being forced on the car companies, not requested by them.
Remember that they need to be called by an app, so the car company knows who's in them, and there will be cameras. If the person after you complains about a problem, they look at the previous journey(s), catch the culprit and charge them for the clean or ban them.
Meanwhile the person that complains can wait for another car.
Taxis work, even without the facility for banning people. There's no reason these couldn't work with that ability.
He didn't concede anything. He's absolutely right that there are many transportation options, and the ones you use in 13 years time will differ from now.
The most obvious is that you buy an electric car, and simply charge it up at a public charger. But there are several more.
You sound like you don't actually use a car that much. Just to work and back. So a 200-300 mile range car would probably go for days between you needing to recharge it. And you're looking at about 30-45 minutes for an 80% charge at a supercharger.
And that's today. By 2025 or 2030 or 2040 when the bans come in in various countries, ranges will have gone up and charge times for a given distance down.
They are starting to put superchargers in petrol stations now, along with cafe areas whilst you wait that half an hour.
Another option for people like you will be cars as a service. Order a car, just like an Uber, and it'll drive you to work. Only no driver needed as it'll be fully autonomous. Parking and charging are not your problem.
Then again, if you own your own autonomous car, then you could tell it to go to a public charger and charge itself without your needing to go with it.
Because as you will see here and on other forums, there are some people that will simply refuse to move on from gas to electricity, no matter what. Idiots that won't accept the reality of global warming, and are simply incapable of change. The option to buy ICE cars simply needs to be taken away,
But the rate the computers are catching up is staggering. Computers consistently beating even the most skilled people progressing from Tic-Tac-Toe -> Chess -> Go took about 50 years.
(Of course he perfect play on Tic-Tac-Toe only means drawing if you are second to play.)
Not much use if you work. Unless you can get stuff delivered to work.
A website experience would be poor vs a native app.
It would likely be lacking in features, as there are things you can't do with a web site. And it would prevent using the Apple Watch.
iPhone users want the Uber app. And there's no reason to stop them. They had a good reason to use an entitlement at the time, and now they don't need it any more they'll be removing it.
That's what Amazon Pickup Locations are for.
You don't know what you are taking about. iOS does not list permissions. You are thinking of Android.
Pretty obviously because iPhone users want to be able to use Ubers.
Flex is Uber for deliveries. Gig economy work for individuals with their own vehicles (usually cars) hired in blocks of time (currently 4 hours) using an app. In fact many of the drivers are Uber drivers diversifying their income. They drive Uber most of the time, but do a block of Amazon Flex deliveries when they can get a block.
As you know if you really do use Uber, when you enter the details of your trip, you are shown estimates for each of the cab types (UberX, UberExec).
ALWAYS.
Surges happen when the roads are at their busiest, so estimates are much harder. And so on the screen yuo mention it shows the minimum fare - what it will be if congestion is not too bad. Plus the price per mile/minute info.
And now you are wining about being shown the price per mile and per minute. But in a previous comment you were praising black cabs for the fact that they displayed the price per mile and per minute on the cab. Which shows you are not being objective here.
Even then, get rid of them. Even if you have to suppress them individually after checking with a #pragma to get a clear build. Because if you get into a habit of ignoring warnings with each build, you won't notice new warnings when they appear.
Backwards compatibility is a good thing. But it's not the only thing. It's balanced against improving the language for the better. There's a balance to be made.
But this isn't about why the thread started, it's about this particular comment you made: "Language design is an old, old problem. Parameter ordering consistency is also a well known, old old problem. If you can't get it right the first time, then you have no business designing a language."
Apple hasn't been reordering their parameters, and "you have no business designing a language." Is just ridiculous. Swift is a fantastic language and gets better with each release.
It's not a lie. You claimed they switched around the order of parameters. I asked you for an example, and the one you mentioned wasn't true.
Backwards compatibility: no they don't keep or pretend to keep that. But that wasn't the point in question.
I doubt that you know. You are so very clearly anti-Uber, it's not credible that you open the Uber app when you want to travel.
If all you are doing is writing drivers or embedded stuff, then C will serve you fine. But be clear about the fact that your preference is suitable for your niche, and most people are not in that niche.
C is not a good general purpose programming language any more.
So you have nothing. You were making it up. Don't be surprised when you get called out on it.
Because you are trusting. Because you are in a hurry. Because you can't be bothered. Habit. There are any number of reasons most people don't ask how much they owe till the end of the journey.
No with me I don't think.
Swift didn't come out till 2014. And there certainly wan't any switching round of parameters in long established APIs in Obj-C.
I'm not sure you are complaining about anything real here.
The selector, then an object to be passed to the selector, then whether to wait to continue.
That hasn't changed order, has it?
No what aren't?
Yes, I'm an iOS developer. Have been since 2008, and a developer in general since the 1980s. Seriously, always fix your errors then your warnings before you do anything else. Anything else will bite you in the arse.