The multipliers are a complete load of crap.
They're supposedly based on demand, yet...I've noticed I can open the app, see a sea of available uber cars, and yet there will be a 2.5x multiplier in effect.
I talk with almost every driver I ride with and ask them how Uber works for them. Some are clearly filtering, others quite honest and forthright. In general a lot of them seem to be reasonably pleased.
The near-universal complaint is the star rating system. For those who don't know: Uber requires drivers maintain a FOUR AND A HALF STAR RATING or they're "fired."
One driver described a guy who he picked up, he was cheerful and polite, the guy barked out the address, glowered in the back seat with his hoodie up, didn't say a word, got out, and gave the driver a 1 star rating.
Other drivers complained that many of their fares are drunk out of their minds and give them ratings that are, at best, a mistake. People can't dial a telephone when they're drunk, but uber wants them to give a subjective rating? Can't you imagine the drunk chick who's all "WEEEEELELLLLL I THOUGHT HE HAAAAAAD A FUNNNNNNAAAY NOSE. TWO STARS FOR YOU!"
Most of the drivers said that the star system just simply wasn't understood by passengers - or that passengers had a star-to-happiness scale the drivers thought was reasonable, but Uber's scaling was absurd; they don't fault the passengers at all. I've said to each driver that "One star means you did something horrible, or I felt unsafe, or the car was filthy, etc. Two stars means something was off. Three stars to me meant a fine ride, no complaints. Four stars meant something was above the norm/my expectations. Five stars meant singing angels descended."
Each nodded and said, basically: exactly, totally reasonable...but Uber expects that even if the ride was nothing special, you're giving drivers 4-5 stars.
I'm sure you've got some beautiful excuse for how this is just the way you're dealing with having so many people who want to drive for Uber. But really, with a ranking system none of the customers understand how you use, you might as well just be employing Russian Roulette.
Oh, and by the way: I'm fed up with the fact that I can't leave feedback/a complaint for drivers I have to cancel a ride with because a driver was dicking around for 10 minutes (I call these guys the Uber Couch Drivers - they're sitting on the couch withthe app open...get up, brush their teeth, make a sandwich, kiss the wife goodbye, take the dog for a walk, then get in the car, adjust their hair, punch in my address into the GPS, then make their way over). Fed up with the fact that there's no way to reach a person at Uber if there's a problem, like accidentally leaving something in the car, or having an immediate safety concern about a vehicle or driver. I'm fed up with the form replies to complaints via the app (I don't want $5, or even $10 off my next ride. I want to you to fix the problem I complained about), and I'm fed up with your marketing staff thinking they're just the Bee's Knees. Three times I've tried to get Uber to do a promo for an event that totally fits Uber's potential customer base, and each time, the best that you could offer was your standard $10 off a ride, only for new signups. Which as an event organizer, made me take a big, epic Polite Chuckle and delete the email. You might as well employ robots as your marketing staff, because they've got about as much freedom or creativity as one.
Public transportation is en expensive service, mostly subsidized through taxes, these hypocritical parasites help make it that much more expensive for everybody else.
Until you start paying a toll box at the end of your driveway, stop bitching about people fare-evading or the cost of public transit projects.
If it's "mostly subsidized through taxes", then why are there (rather significant) fares, and why is fare evasion such a massive issue? It's either "public" or it isn't, and it's either "mostly subsidized" or it isn't. In my city, a monthly bus+subway pass costs $70/month. That's cheaper than owning a car, but not by much, and the system is, among other things, clearly laid out to isolate rich neighborhoods from poor ones, and service ends around midnight. It's also hobbled significantly by the massive amount of traffic, namely all the selfish assholes sitting in their cars, alone, clogging up the streets so the busses, which take up about 3-4 cars worth of space, hold 30-60 people.
Nevermind that in many countries - the US for example - public transit spending is a fraction of the spending on roads (and airports), and drivers do not even remotely come close to paying for their share of the maintenance costs of roads, just like airlines and their passengers do not even remotely come close to paying for airports and related infrastructure. In my particular state, the various fees and taxes collected from drivers equates to about a third of the total cost of our roads.
It's particularly infuriating since those road costs are predominantly out in rural areas, where few people use them. Those rural areas tend to be full of "fiscal conservatives" who don't like "handouts." Their elected representatives consistently vote down public transit projects, declaring them a "waste." The cities are the economic engines, generating the most tax revenue. They're also the most efficient places to live, in terms of utilities and transportation. And the places which most desperately need, and benefit from, solid public transit.
Cyclists take "the middle of the lane" in areas where they know there isn't enough space for them to be passed safely. In many states and countries, this is procedure recommended by officials, and codified in law.
If cyclists pulled over to let traffic by, they'd spend all day simply standing at the side of the road.
The white line denotes the start of the road surface. Cyclists are not required to ride to the right of it, particularly since there's debris such as glass and metal that will destroy tires.
Rural one-lane roads are not "highways", especially if there is no shoulder.
A cyclist on a bike is not a "tour de france wannabee" any more than you in your car are an "Indianapolis 500 wannabee."
You're the one who seems righteous (and selfish) thinking you're the only one allowed to use the road, or that you're given some sort of magical preference over other road users.
Are you talking about the southern california driver who started a confrontation with two cyclists, then ended it by pulling around them and then slamming on the brakes, gravely injuring one of them? Then told a police officer he did it to "teach them a lesson"? He was convicted of multiple felonies, 6, I think, by a jury.
I laughed when I saw the comment about cyclists being "provocative" right after the commenter says "you tell them to get out of your way."
Your comment shows the same bias. The reason they get their cars kicked and spit on is because they "buzz" a group of cyclists to "teach them a lesson" or honk at them to "get them out of my way" or scream "GET OUT OF THE ROAD" out their window.
You think we're second class, subservient road users. You think roads "are for cars." You fly into an absolute rage at the sight of two people riding their bicycles next to each other instead of one behind the other. You endanger our lives, and then when finally we have enough and stop being silent, you scream blue-bloody-murder about it.
As a pedestrian, I fail to see why having two-wheeled idiots blasting through red lights is safer for me.
Strawman. Nobody is suggested legalizing the behavior you describe. Also, drivers are blasting through those same lights, at equal or greater speed, presenting far more danger - but you already accept them doing so.
Second: In NYC, 99.9% or so of pedestrian injuries are due to motor vehicle drivers. The remainder are due to collisions with cyclists. The city does not track fault in such collisions. Ride a bike in the city and you'll learn quickly that pedestrians will step out into the road relying on their ears, right into the path of a cyclist doing 15mph. And then get angry when you manage to avoid not hitting them.
As cycling has exploded in popularity in NYC - increasing by an order of magnitude - pedestrian injuries from collisions with cyclists have fallen. Roads in NYC which have bike lanes added become safer for all road users (people in cars, people on bicycles, people on foot.)
Especially since their view (if they were looking) and mine are likely to be obstructed by the cars & vans they're overtaking (usually on the wrong side).
An average-height adult male riding a bicycle is substantially higher than the roofline of most passenger cars. Our ability to see around us is unmatched by any other road user; most drivers have a viewpoint that's around my waist. And then they're inside a box, where they have roof pillars and other objects obstructing their view.
The right to pass traffic on the "wrong" side aka the righthand side in the US, is a specifically codified right in many states. In my state, we are allowed to pass on the right, and there is even a specific section that specifies that it is not an excuse for a collision with a cyclist that they were passing other traffic on the right.
. They're a group of professionals.... who act like professionals.
First off, "study for a test that's hard" is not "professional." A professional is someone who spends years training in skills specific to their vocation (navigating a city, and driving a passenger car, is not a vocation-specific skill) in order to do it.
Second, calling london cab drivers professionals is a laugh. Fire up youtube and search for "london cyclist attack" and note video after video of cabbies attacking cyclists. If they're such professionals, why do they not understand the rules of the road (that allow the cyclist to be where they are), break the rules themselves, endanger the cyclist, and then attack them?
Certain versions of 10.4 would randomly corrupt the filesystem such that files would start occupying the same chunk of disk space (crosslinked files, I think the term is?)
I saw someone get fired because of that bug (well, not really. She was fired because she was working on client files on her computer and not on the servers, which were backed up...and then the files were hosed by MacOS.)
I think it wasn't until 10.6 or so that many of the mystery problems (that cropped up and went away if you deleted+re-added something...printer, network interface, so on etc) were by and large solved.
10.7 and 10.8 are by and large rock solid. Any time someone comes to us complaining their Mac is crashing randomly, it's *always* a hardware failure. 10.9 is quite solid as well; I wish I could say the same for my late-2013 retina MBP. That and the changes to how MBP's sleep (no sleep indicator, and no way to separate "screen goes to sleep" from "computer goes to sleep", without hacking plists) pisses me off, but has yet to piss me off enough to get down to the Apple Store to have it looked at.
A women may be less likely to be murdered but more likely to be raped.
That's mostly because the FBI doesn't consider prison rape to be a crime; I think the estimates I hear are typically around 200,000-300,000 male prison rape victims a year, which comes close to making the rape stats 50/50. There's also very little interest in figuring out the underreporting rate for male rape victims in open society; hell, in many places it isn't even a crime for a woman to rape a man because of the way rape was defined.
But even if you ignore all that: I'll take those odds. Rape has the lowest occurrence rate in the US of any violent crime, and not only that, it's declined the most over the last decade or two as well. Men are several times more likely to be KILLED. Last time I checked, that was worse.
By the way: case clearance rates for female homicide victims are higher than for male homicide victims.
You can either listen to the gender issues folks, who make it sound like violence against women is a HUGE CRISIS, or you can read the BJS statistics. Women have been, and continue to be, a protected class in the US.
At least in the US, women kill more men than women.
Also, while gender issues folks are more than happy to do all sorts of mental gymnastics for other things: nobody is willing to touch "why do men commit robbery more?" with a ten foot pole because then they'd have to admit that traditional gender roles for men are still very much in place, men are judged heavily by their economic status, and men are committing crime by and large to house, feed, and clothe their families.
Lots of assistance for single mothers out there, like WIC. Single dads? Shit outta luck.
Guess what percentage of the US homeless population is male? Depending on the area, anywhere from 67% to 80% (NYC, for example, is 82%.) Oh, and the percentage of women in homeless shelters is higher than the percentage of homeless women total, showing women are better served.
You know that noise you hear from Priuses that sounds like an electrical buzzing/whirring?
The car's drivetrain doesn't make that noise. That's artificial noise, designed specifically to warn pedestrians when the engine is inactive. I was surprised the first time I drove a Prius, because you can't hear that noise from inside the car. I'd assumed it would be louder.
The person text-walking is completely at fault. How stupid can you be to text-walk in a parking lot?
Heel and toe is a technique for blipping the gas pedal with the RIGHT foot while using the left foot to actuate the clutch, in order to have a smoother downshift by raising engine revs for the new lower gear.
Left foot braking was pioneered by Walter Rohl driving the turbocharged Audi rally cars. It's pointless in non-turbocharged cars, and completely pointless in an electric car.
This guy? It's a combination of elderly driver (notice most causes of "unintended" acceleration involve elderly drivers) and inappropriate footwear. Living in a northeast state, I can tell you that I learned my first winter as a driver (when I was 16-17) that boots were different from shoes when driving. This idiot is 65 and apparently just figured it out after almost 50 years of driving? Bullshit. This was just a bunch of sensationalist muckraking, complete with the scary stock photos of an "automobile crash."
Should the pedal spacing match other cars? Yes. Should the Tesla lock out acceleration when the brake pedal is pushed? Yes - most throttle-by-wire cars do this (and you can probably expect a software update soon, I'm guessing, though such a sensitive bit of code needs to be fully validated.) Was it the car's fault that he supposedly almost crashed? Nope.
It's virtually impossible to land a large plane in the water "safely"; if either wing or engine touches the water before the other, that side digs in and the plane cartwheels, ripping itself to shreds.
The hudson plane landing wasn't a miracle because of skill on the part of the pilot - it was a miracle because it was astronomically slim odds that the plane would continue in a straight line and remain intact.
Try this youtube video of Curtis visting the guys at Flitetest for a really great look at how it works, flying it, etc. from some guys who really know their RC stuff:
Flitetest is pretty awesome, by the way; I stumbled across their channel a couple of months ago and have been quite entertained. They're the closest thing I can think of to "Top Gear, only with remote control things that fly."
And I do mean "things" that fly; they routinely have a "can we make ___ fly?" episodes. I think I recall one challenge involved getting a cinderblock into the air.
Smog and levels of particulate matter in large cities are generally a lot lower compared to before the 60s, when a lot of people still heated their houses with coal fires.
Surprisingly, standards for environmental conditions have improved in the last 50 years, particularly given the voluminous amount of evidence on how pollution negatively impacts public health, infrastructure, and nature.
Seemed simple at first. Everyone can just go with micro USB, right?
Then I realized that batteries are getting bigger (and able to handle faster charge rates), and it's way, way past due for cell phones to start supporting USB3.
So can they make two standards, USB2 micro and USB3 micro?
Tesla can certainly bring it, but the internal combustion engine has over a century of demonstrated reliability.
Keeping in mind that electric cars have been around longer than gasoline cars, and than electric motors are used in the powertrain of every modern locomotive in the united states (and are the prime movers for almost any industrial plant)...not really, actually.
Car engines need a lot of maintenance due to all their sensors, electromechanical and mechanical valves, mazes of hoses and wiring (all of which has to deal with high temperatures), dependence on multiple fluid types (the fuel, the coolant, the lubricant) and need for so much cooling (gasoline engines waste 3/4 of their fuel on heat.) One of the reasons Tesla is getting away with not having dealers is that the cars are so much simpler drivetrain-wise. I imagine the only fluids that need changing are the brake fluid and probably the gearbox oil.
An electric car for the presidential limo would be brilliant, particularly since it typically doesn't need to travel very far most of the time, and an electric vehicle provides massive torque for handling the heft of all that chassis and armor. Adapting an electric drivetrain, in part because of how simple it is and how flexible one can be with component locations, would actually make it far easier on the coach builder. Tesla already has a dual-motor AWD drivetrain, so they've definitely got the oomph (although I suspect the dual-motor drivetrain motors are individually smaller.)
" who could help cure cancer "
BWHAAHAAHHA. I work in academia/research. The pay, compared to industry, is garbage.
Pretty decent educational benefits, great paid time off...but the money coming in the door is, as I said, garbage.
Slashdot Mirror
The multipliers are a complete load of crap. They're supposedly based on demand, yet...I've noticed I can open the app, see a sea of available uber cars, and yet there will be a 2.5x multiplier in effect.
I talk with almost every driver I ride with and ask them how Uber works for them. Some are clearly filtering, others quite honest and forthright. In general a lot of them seem to be reasonably pleased.
The near-universal complaint is the star rating system. For those who don't know: Uber requires drivers maintain a FOUR AND A HALF STAR RATING or they're "fired."
One driver described a guy who he picked up, he was cheerful and polite, the guy barked out the address, glowered in the back seat with his hoodie up, didn't say a word, got out, and gave the driver a 1 star rating.
Other drivers complained that many of their fares are drunk out of their minds and give them ratings that are, at best, a mistake. People can't dial a telephone when they're drunk, but uber wants them to give a subjective rating? Can't you imagine the drunk chick who's all "WEEEEELELLLLL I THOUGHT HE HAAAAAAD A FUNNNNNNAAAY NOSE. TWO STARS FOR YOU!"
Most of the drivers said that the star system just simply wasn't understood by passengers - or that passengers had a star-to-happiness scale the drivers thought was reasonable, but Uber's scaling was absurd; they don't fault the passengers at all. I've said to each driver that "One star means you did something horrible, or I felt unsafe, or the car was filthy, etc. Two stars means something was off. Three stars to me meant a fine ride, no complaints. Four stars meant something was above the norm/my expectations. Five stars meant singing angels descended."
Each nodded and said, basically: exactly, totally reasonable...but Uber expects that even if the ride was nothing special, you're giving drivers 4-5 stars.
I'm sure you've got some beautiful excuse for how this is just the way you're dealing with having so many people who want to drive for Uber. But really, with a ranking system none of the customers understand how you use, you might as well just be employing Russian Roulette.
Oh, and by the way: I'm fed up with the fact that I can't leave feedback/a complaint for drivers I have to cancel a ride with because a driver was dicking around for 10 minutes (I call these guys the Uber Couch Drivers - they're sitting on the couch withthe app open...get up, brush their teeth, make a sandwich, kiss the wife goodbye, take the dog for a walk, then get in the car, adjust their hair, punch in my address into the GPS, then make their way over). Fed up with the fact that there's no way to reach a person at Uber if there's a problem, like accidentally leaving something in the car, or having an immediate safety concern about a vehicle or driver. I'm fed up with the form replies to complaints via the app (I don't want $5, or even $10 off my next ride. I want to you to fix the problem I complained about), and I'm fed up with your marketing staff thinking they're just the Bee's Knees. Three times I've tried to get Uber to do a promo for an event that totally fits Uber's potential customer base, and each time, the best that you could offer was your standard $10 off a ride, only for new signups. Which as an event organizer, made me take a big, epic Polite Chuckle and delete the email. You might as well employ robots as your marketing staff, because they've got about as much freedom or creativity as one.
Public transportation is en expensive service, mostly subsidized through taxes, these hypocritical parasites help make it that much more expensive for everybody else.
Until you start paying a toll box at the end of your driveway, stop bitching about people fare-evading or the cost of public transit projects.
If it's "mostly subsidized through taxes", then why are there (rather significant) fares, and why is fare evasion such a massive issue? It's either "public" or it isn't, and it's either "mostly subsidized" or it isn't. In my city, a monthly bus+subway pass costs $70/month. That's cheaper than owning a car, but not by much, and the system is, among other things, clearly laid out to isolate rich neighborhoods from poor ones, and service ends around midnight. It's also hobbled significantly by the massive amount of traffic, namely all the selfish assholes sitting in their cars, alone, clogging up the streets so the busses, which take up about 3-4 cars worth of space, hold 30-60 people.
Nevermind that in many countries - the US for example - public transit spending is a fraction of the spending on roads (and airports), and drivers do not even remotely come close to paying for their share of the maintenance costs of roads, just like airlines and their passengers do not even remotely come close to paying for airports and related infrastructure. In my particular state, the various fees and taxes collected from drivers equates to about a third of the total cost of our roads.
It's particularly infuriating since those road costs are predominantly out in rural areas, where few people use them. Those rural areas tend to be full of "fiscal conservatives" who don't like "handouts." Their elected representatives consistently vote down public transit projects, declaring them a "waste." The cities are the economic engines, generating the most tax revenue. They're also the most efficient places to live, in terms of utilities and transportation. And the places which most desperately need, and benefit from, solid public transit.
" but if it gets a crack or gouge in it, the frame can't be mended... it has to be tossed"
Calfree has been repairing CF frames and components for over a decade. I have no idea why you're claiming it's not repairable.
Cyclists take "the middle of the lane" in areas where they know there isn't enough space for them to be passed safely. In many states and countries, this is procedure recommended by officials, and codified in law.
If cyclists pulled over to let traffic by, they'd spend all day simply standing at the side of the road.
The white line denotes the start of the road surface. Cyclists are not required to ride to the right of it, particularly since there's debris such as glass and metal that will destroy tires.
Rural one-lane roads are not "highways", especially if there is no shoulder.
A cyclist on a bike is not a "tour de france wannabee" any more than you in your car are an "Indianapolis 500 wannabee."
You're the one who seems righteous (and selfish) thinking you're the only one allowed to use the road, or that you're given some sort of magical preference over other road users.
Are you talking about the southern california driver who started a confrontation with two cyclists, then ended it by pulling around them and then slamming on the brakes, gravely injuring one of them? Then told a police officer he did it to "teach them a lesson"? He was convicted of multiple felonies, 6, I think, by a jury.
http://www.npr.org/templates/s...
I laughed when I saw the comment about cyclists being "provocative" right after the commenter says "you tell them to get out of your way."
Your comment shows the same bias. The reason they get their cars kicked and spit on is because they "buzz" a group of cyclists to "teach them a lesson" or honk at them to "get them out of my way" or scream "GET OUT OF THE ROAD" out their window.
You think we're second class, subservient road users. You think roads "are for cars." You fly into an absolute rage at the sight of two people riding their bicycles next to each other instead of one behind the other. You endanger our lives, and then when finally we have enough and stop being silent, you scream blue-bloody-murder about it.
As a pedestrian, I fail to see why having two-wheeled idiots blasting through red lights is safer for me.
Strawman. Nobody is suggested legalizing the behavior you describe. Also, drivers are blasting through those same lights, at equal or greater speed, presenting far more danger - but you already accept them doing so.
Second: In NYC, 99.9% or so of pedestrian injuries are due to motor vehicle drivers. The remainder are due to collisions with cyclists. The city does not track fault in such collisions. Ride a bike in the city and you'll learn quickly that pedestrians will step out into the road relying on their ears, right into the path of a cyclist doing 15mph. And then get angry when you manage to avoid not hitting them.
As cycling has exploded in popularity in NYC - increasing by an order of magnitude - pedestrian injuries from collisions with cyclists have fallen. Roads in NYC which have bike lanes added become safer for all road users (people in cars, people on bicycles, people on foot.)
Especially since their view (if they were looking) and mine are likely to be obstructed by the cars & vans they're overtaking (usually on the wrong side).
An average-height adult male riding a bicycle is substantially higher than the roofline of most passenger cars. Our ability to see around us is unmatched by any other road user; most drivers have a viewpoint that's around my waist. And then they're inside a box, where they have roof pillars and other objects obstructing their view.
The right to pass traffic on the "wrong" side aka the righthand side in the US, is a specifically codified right in many states. In my state, we are allowed to pass on the right, and there is even a specific section that specifies that it is not an excuse for a collision with a cyclist that they were passing other traffic on the right.
. They're a group of professionals.... who act like professionals.
First off, "study for a test that's hard" is not "professional." A professional is someone who spends years training in skills specific to their vocation (navigating a city, and driving a passenger car, is not a vocation-specific skill) in order to do it.
Second, calling london cab drivers professionals is a laugh. Fire up youtube and search for "london cyclist attack" and note video after video of cabbies attacking cyclists. If they're such professionals, why do they not understand the rules of the road (that allow the cyclist to be where they are), break the rules themselves, endanger the cyclist, and then attack them?
I've been using linux since 1998. I don't need a lecture on open source licensing.
Charging for access to data is fundamentally incompatible with claiming it's "open source" by many people's definitions.
open "sourced", not "open source."
http://osvdb.org/about
I was confused about how someone could be charged for access to "open source" information...
Here's the NPO, with two officers, backing it:
http://opensecurityfoundation....
You never used 10.4, did you?
Certain versions of 10.4 would randomly corrupt the filesystem such that files would start occupying the same chunk of disk space (crosslinked files, I think the term is?)
I saw someone get fired because of that bug (well, not really. She was fired because she was working on client files on her computer and not on the servers, which were backed up...and then the files were hosed by MacOS.)
I think it wasn't until 10.6 or so that many of the mystery problems (that cropped up and went away if you deleted+re-added something...printer, network interface, so on etc) were by and large solved.
10.7 and 10.8 are by and large rock solid. Any time someone comes to us complaining their Mac is crashing randomly, it's *always* a hardware failure. 10.9 is quite solid as well; I wish I could say the same for my late-2013 retina MBP. That and the changes to how MBP's sleep (no sleep indicator, and no way to separate "screen goes to sleep" from "computer goes to sleep", without hacking plists) pisses me off, but has yet to piss me off enough to get down to the Apple Store to have it looked at.
Who moderated my comment as "offtopic"? The story is about the odds of being murdered!
A women may be less likely to be murdered but more likely to be raped.
That's mostly because the FBI doesn't consider prison rape to be a crime; I think the estimates I hear are typically around 200,000-300,000 male prison rape victims a year, which comes close to making the rape stats 50/50. There's also very little interest in figuring out the underreporting rate for male rape victims in open society; hell, in many places it isn't even a crime for a woman to rape a man because of the way rape was defined.
But even if you ignore all that: I'll take those odds. Rape has the lowest occurrence rate in the US of any violent crime, and not only that, it's declined the most over the last decade or two as well. Men are several times more likely to be KILLED. Last time I checked, that was worse.
By the way: case clearance rates for female homicide victims are higher than for male homicide victims.
You can either listen to the gender issues folks, who make it sound like violence against women is a HUGE CRISIS, or you can read the BJS statistics. Women have been, and continue to be, a protected class in the US.
At least in the US, women kill more men than women.
Also, while gender issues folks are more than happy to do all sorts of mental gymnastics for other things: nobody is willing to touch "why do men commit robbery more?" with a ten foot pole because then they'd have to admit that traditional gender roles for men are still very much in place, men are judged heavily by their economic status, and men are committing crime by and large to house, feed, and clothe their families.
Lots of assistance for single mothers out there, like WIC. Single dads? Shit outta luck.
Guess what percentage of the US homeless population is male? Depending on the area, anywhere from 67% to 80% (NYC, for example, is 82%.) Oh, and the percentage of women in homeless shelters is higher than the percentage of homeless women total, showing women are better served.
Male privilege, my ass.
You know that noise you hear from Priuses that sounds like an electrical buzzing/whirring?
The car's drivetrain doesn't make that noise. That's artificial noise, designed specifically to warn pedestrians when the engine is inactive. I was surprised the first time I drove a Prius, because you can't hear that noise from inside the car. I'd assumed it would be louder.
The person text-walking is completely at fault. How stupid can you be to text-walk in a parking lot?
Betteridge's Law of Headlines still holds true.
Too finicky, too expensive, most people myself included don't have the need for one in their home, so on etc.
None of the "consumer" level units have come close to approaching the ease of use of a circa-1995 inkjet printer.
Heel and toe is a technique for blipping the gas pedal with the RIGHT foot while using the left foot to actuate the clutch, in order to have a smoother downshift by raising engine revs for the new lower gear.
Left foot braking was pioneered by Walter Rohl driving the turbocharged Audi rally cars. It's pointless in non-turbocharged cars, and completely pointless in an electric car.
This guy? It's a combination of elderly driver (notice most causes of "unintended" acceleration involve elderly drivers) and inappropriate footwear. Living in a northeast state, I can tell you that I learned my first winter as a driver (when I was 16-17) that boots were different from shoes when driving. This idiot is 65 and apparently just figured it out after almost 50 years of driving? Bullshit. This was just a bunch of sensationalist muckraking, complete with the scary stock photos of an "automobile crash."
Should the pedal spacing match other cars? Yes. Should the Tesla lock out acceleration when the brake pedal is pushed? Yes - most throttle-by-wire cars do this (and you can probably expect a software update soon, I'm guessing, though such a sensitive bit of code needs to be fully validated.) Was it the car's fault that he supposedly almost crashed? Nope.
It's virtually impossible to land a large plane in the water "safely"; if either wing or engine touches the water before the other, that side digs in and the plane cartwheels, ripping itself to shreds.
The hudson plane landing wasn't a miracle because of skill on the part of the pilot - it was a miracle because it was astronomically slim odds that the plane would continue in a straight line and remain intact.
Try this youtube video of Curtis visting the guys at Flitetest for a really great look at how it works, flying it, etc. from some guys who really know their RC stuff:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Flitetest is pretty awesome, by the way; I stumbled across their channel a couple of months ago and have been quite entertained. They're the closest thing I can think of to "Top Gear, only with remote control things that fly."
And I do mean "things" that fly; they routinely have a "can we make ___ fly?" episodes. I think I recall one challenge involved getting a cinderblock into the air.
No.
( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... )
Smog and levels of particulate matter in large cities are generally a lot lower compared to before the 60s, when a lot of people still heated their houses with coal fires.
Surprisingly, standards for environmental conditions have improved in the last 50 years, particularly given the voluminous amount of evidence on how pollution negatively impacts public health, infrastructure, and nature.
Seemed simple at first. Everyone can just go with micro USB, right?
Then I realized that batteries are getting bigger (and able to handle faster charge rates), and it's way, way past due for cell phones to start supporting USB3.
So can they make two standards, USB2 micro and USB3 micro?
Also, here's the original EU press release: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/...
I don't see any mention of a specific standard...?
Tesla can certainly bring it, but the internal combustion engine has over a century of demonstrated reliability.
Keeping in mind that electric cars have been around longer than gasoline cars, and than electric motors are used in the powertrain of every modern locomotive in the united states (and are the prime movers for almost any industrial plant)...not really, actually.
Car engines need a lot of maintenance due to all their sensors, electromechanical and mechanical valves, mazes of hoses and wiring (all of which has to deal with high temperatures), dependence on multiple fluid types (the fuel, the coolant, the lubricant) and need for so much cooling (gasoline engines waste 3/4 of their fuel on heat.) One of the reasons Tesla is getting away with not having dealers is that the cars are so much simpler drivetrain-wise. I imagine the only fluids that need changing are the brake fluid and probably the gearbox oil.
An electric car for the presidential limo would be brilliant, particularly since it typically doesn't need to travel very far most of the time, and an electric vehicle provides massive torque for handling the heft of all that chassis and armor. Adapting an electric drivetrain, in part because of how simple it is and how flexible one can be with component locations, would actually make it far easier on the coach builder. Tesla already has a dual-motor AWD drivetrain, so they've definitely got the oomph (although I suspect the dual-motor drivetrain motors are individually smaller.)
The founder of the MIT Media Lab, which churns out nothing but useless ivory-tower crap, moved on to something more shiny?
Shocking.
OLPC was nothing more than a way to pay for travel to academic conferences and get his name into stuff.
" who could help cure cancer " BWHAAHAAHHA. I work in academia/research. The pay, compared to industry, is garbage. Pretty decent educational benefits, great paid time off...but the money coming in the door is, as I said, garbage.