There is no single "libertarian" view of intellectual property.
This is a classic shell game applied to political theory. They hide their real beliefs and the fact that Libertarianism is a bankrupt philosophy designed to concentrate wealth amongst the already wealthy.
1. Your smart phone (with enough battery to last your trip)
No, only enough to start the car. Better not stop it and get out anywhere along the route, though. Of course, once the car is started, you can charge your phone from one of the car's USB outlets.
2. Connectivity to the internet.
I don't think that this is correct. I think you only need bluetooth.
You want more nuclear facilities in the Middle East? Really?
In any case, I would be willing to bet that bids for solar power would be lower than nuclear. Providing power for desalination is an ideal application for solar power, because it is easy to accommodate the intermittent nature of solar.
How about just cutting the icebergs and just shipping it by chunks?
No one posting here on/. should have to ask that question.
The answer is melting. Heat intake is through the surface (x squared), while total heat required to melt depends on the volume (x cubed). Larger volumes melt more slowly.
In a desert it makes more sense to use solar thermal
Or PV. It's a very good use of PV, since it can run when there is sunlight, shut down the desalination plant when the sunlight disappears, then just wait for more sun.
Me? It's 2018 for God's sake. There is no excuse for punishment anymore. We're adults.
It's the new/old plan. Some people want to take the USA back to the days before 1863, but with some improvements. Here is the gameplan: 1. Pass laws to make several harmless activities illegal. 2. Incarcerate people under the above laws (bonus if the implementation of those laws tends to disproportionately incarcerate darker-skinned people) 3. Obtain the benefits of slavery of the incarcerated people. 4. Get the middle class to pay for the housing costs that in pre-1863 days the slave owner would have to pay.
"An even greater share of the world's computer chips are designed domestically and made overseas by companies including Qualcomm, Apple, Broadcom and Nvidia."
This reads as though Qualcomm, Apple, Broadcom and Nvidia are making chips. What would be clear and accurate is:
"An even greater share of the world's computer chips are designed domestically by companies including Qualcomm, Apple, Broadcom and Nvidia and made overseas."
There are plenty of Republicans who didn't want this President, and painting all of us with that brush is just as foolish as the prejudiced tweets from the Blowhard-In-Chief.
Did you vote for him? If so, all you are doing is attempting to deflect from your own culpability.
Most EVs charging will take place overnight, or in office car parks. Numbers of gas stations are irrelevant. You can't project the number of gas stations into anything useful for EV charging.
I would not say they are unaware of the issue as the have made some moves to a standard charger plug in anticipation of a growing market. It's more of a lack of sales to warrant spending money on the issue and seeing EVs as more of city commuter cars at present where charging is not an issue.
You are in the same mindset as the traditional manufacturers. It's a chicken-and-egg problem. Sales will continue to be limited until the charger infrastructure for long journeys is in place. If you wait for sales to happen before building the infrastructure, they won't happen.
The other part of that issue is that traditional car companies seem not even be aware of the problem. They seem to think that someone else will solve the charging issue. Even the plans in place put a large proportion of the new chargers in dealerships instead of along highways. Who wants to come off the highway to get to a dealership and then, who wants to wait at a dealership?
Chargers require permits and this process isn't quick in many places.
The lack of attention to the issue by traditional auto manufacturers combined with the head start that Tesla has means that it will still be an advantage for Tesla for several years.
Gas stations can just add a charging station or two. Which is a lot cheaper than what Tesla has done.
What makes a gas station a better location for EV chargers than where Tesla has been installing its chargers? The bad coffee? The dirty restrooms? The smell of gasoline?
No one really wants to stop at a gas station. In contrast, many Tesla Superchargers are sited near Starbucks or restaurants. Places where people actually want to stop.
Tesla has nothing whatsoever to gain from keeping the fossil fuel industry happy.
You have to get out of the mindset of an ICE vehicle driver.
Slashdot Mirror
I was thinking of the Model 3.
This is a classic shell game applied to political theory. They hide their real beliefs and the fact that Libertarianism is a bankrupt philosophy designed to concentrate wealth amongst the already wealthy.
No, only enough to start the car. Better not stop it and get out anywhere along the route, though. Of course, once the car is started, you can charge your phone from one of the car's USB outlets.
I don't think that this is correct. I think you only need bluetooth.
Yes, that's an important point. They would also need to invent technologies to store the freshwater. LOL!
You want more nuclear facilities in the Middle East? Really?
In any case, I would be willing to bet that bids for solar power would be lower than nuclear. Providing power for desalination is an ideal application for solar power, because it is easy to accommodate the intermittent nature of solar.
You screwed up. Not your math, but the facts that you asserted.
The UAE is 86 BILLION m2. Not 80 MILLION m2.
No one posting here on /. should have to ask that question.
The answer is melting. Heat intake is through the surface (x squared), while total heat required to melt depends on the volume (x cubed). Larger volumes melt more slowly.
Or PV. It's a very good use of PV, since it can run when there is sunlight, shut down the desalination plant when the sunlight disappears, then just wait for more sun.
It's the new/old plan. Some people want to take the USA back to the days before 1863, but with some improvements. Here is the gameplan:
1. Pass laws to make several harmless activities illegal.
2. Incarcerate people under the above laws (bonus if the implementation of those laws tends to disproportionately incarcerate darker-skinned people)
3. Obtain the benefits of slavery of the incarcerated people.
4. Get the middle class to pay for the housing costs that in pre-1863 days the slave owner would have to pay.
Oh, please.
Firstly, that's the ads that Facebook found. There may be far more that Facebook did not identify.
But the ads were a tiny part of Russia's campaign. Russia used troll farms to influence people though cost-free posts.
It's a delay tactic.
No, it's not. There is a reason that there are electricity tariffs such as "Economy 7", which provides cheaper electricity at night.
"An even greater share of the world's computer chips are designed domestically and made overseas by companies including Qualcomm, Apple, Broadcom and Nvidia."
This reads as though Qualcomm, Apple, Broadcom and Nvidia are making chips. What would be clear and accurate is:
"An even greater share of the world's computer chips are designed domestically by companies including Qualcomm, Apple, Broadcom and Nvidia and made overseas."
And if the author is Mike Pence?
Did you vote for him? If so, all you are doing is attempting to deflect from your own culpability.
Get your mind out of the ICE mindset.
Most EVs charging will take place overnight, or in office car parks. Numbers of gas stations are irrelevant. You can't project the number of gas stations into anything useful for EV charging.
You are in the same mindset as the traditional manufacturers. It's a chicken-and-egg problem. Sales will continue to be limited until the charger infrastructure for long journeys is in place. If you wait for sales to happen before building the infrastructure, they won't happen.
The other part of that issue is that traditional car companies seem not even be aware of the problem. They seem to think that someone else will solve the charging issue. Even the plans in place put a large proportion of the new chargers in dealerships instead of along highways. Who wants to come off the highway to get to a dealership and then, who wants to wait at a dealership?
Chargers require permits and this process isn't quick in many places.
The lack of attention to the issue by traditional auto manufacturers combined with the head start that Tesla has means that it will still be an advantage for Tesla for several years.
So are coffee shops and restaurants and parking lots.
What makes a gas station a better location for EV chargers than where Tesla has been installing its chargers? The bad coffee? The dirty restrooms? The smell of gasoline?
No one really wants to stop at a gas station. In contrast, many Tesla Superchargers are sited near Starbucks or restaurants. Places where people actually want to stop.
Tesla has nothing whatsoever to gain from keeping the fossil fuel industry happy.
You have to get out of the mindset of an ICE vehicle driver.
Yes, and in the USA, all other manufacturers are years behind Tesla in building a charging network that will support long distance drives.
I don't think Nixon was actually "busted". There was no impeachment, no criminal case.
So arguing over what he was "busted for" would seem to be moot.
Yes, but the time after which you can no longer destroy the drives starts earlier than you believe.
And now you try to move the goalposts.
Pathetic!
If the refrigerator contains or is evidence relevant to the lawsuit, yes, it means exactly that.