So now that the question of successful predictions is settled, are you going to start campaigning for clean energy? Since you're such a believer in science then surely a confirmed prediction is enough to convince you?
Dude, that site actually has explanation _and_ _code_ of the way they do calculation. Datasets are not public but they can be obtained by signing an agreement with them. But you can skip all that - the result won't fit into your world-view, so it's invalid anyway.
I just picked gold because it is usually a good indicator and generally recognized as such: It has little use except as a store of value (even when being used in jewelry) and its production costs don't vary much
No, it's not. It's a regular commodity with a price determined mainly by fear and gullibility of the folks. By choosing a period it can be used to justify anything. For example, let's compare price of a can of Diet Coke at Jul 24, 2011. Costco says that it was $5.75 for a 4-pack, so that translates to 320 4-packs of Diet Coke per ounce of gold (price $1837.8 per troy ounce). Today Costco sells the same Coke for $5.87 for a 4-pack - and that translates to 196 packs of Diet Coke per ounce of gold (closing price today is $1146 per troy ounce).
OMGWTF!!@#!111 We have a huge inflation, run for cover!!!11111
But if we instead choose 31 Dec, 2006 when the price was $545 per troy ounce (or 98 cases of Diet Coke), then we have a huge _de_flation.
So the best way to calculate the size of the US bond market is to use the currency in which it is nominated - the US dollar. The market grew, without any trust problems.
Here you go: http://www.pricestats.com/infl... . Again, this is measured directly by checking prices, no BLS or other government agencies are involved.
Ad hominem. I win.
No, you don't. You're terminally diseased and will die soon of brain explosion. It's been almost 10 years and there's still no hyperinflation in sight.
I consider gold to be "stable money" for looking at REAL inflation (as opposed to things like the consumer price index, which has been politically hacked of late to make inflation look small and inflation-"corrected" entitlement payments lower.)
Ok. Let's look at the real inflation measured by directly checking the prices of a wide variety of services and goods: http://bpp.mit.edu/usa/ - inflation is actually below the target rate.
Oh, but I see. You're a goldbugger (i.e. you have a load of bug instead of brain). Sorry, can't be helped. But don't worry, you'll die pretty soon of terminal cognitive dissonance.
One result of this is that, thanks to the government, the US bond market is no longer considered a good investment, because the government now has a track record of changing the rules, when trouble arises
Lemmesee... US bond market in 2007: 36 trillions, US bond market size in 2015: 41 trillions. Yeah, investors surely lost all hope in the US bond market.
In the _actual_ reality, bondholders were given a much sweeter deal than they could have hoped for without government intervention. A firesale of all assets would have resulted in them getting pretty much nothing at all.
As for unions and workers getting their due before the bondholders - I fail to see issues there. Bondholders are paid interest because they are taking the risk, workers are paid because they actually do the work.
The problem is, you CAN NOT get an approval for an alternative generic. This shitty fucktard invoked an FDA clause allowing this company to use "closed distribution". I.e. this company can pick and choose to which customers it sells the drug in exchange for discounted pricing.
Why does it matter? - To market a generic drug you need to show that it's equivalent to an existing drug. And Turing can block any such clinical study - a classic Catch-22. This loophole should be fixed, but given the dysfunctional state of the Congress any bill fixing this will probably be encumbered with a prohibition on abortions and more NSA spying.
"Not interested" means the proposal had too many hooks attached or nothing was valuable in that Tesla protocol.
Really? Nothing interesting in the only charging standard that actually is doing 150kW charging _right_ _now_? Sure.
If Tesla really wants to open it, it should 1) publish it
Telsa pledged to open the standard for anyone interested.
2) allow non-discriminatory third party EV access to their network based on reasonable per-use fee to recoup costs. Otherwise it is just lip service to look good and pump price of shares for next raise of capital.
Nope. This requirement has NOTHING to do with standards - it's perfectly possible to use open standards for private networks. For example, Nissan's dealer ChADeMO network is open for Nissan only.
The point is that Tesla makes its network available to their customers only, it is useless for non-Tesla EVs. At the same time Tesla uses other networks. Not so nice word about would be leaching.
Except that there are NO OTHER CARS that can fully utilize Tesla superchargers. None. Chevy Bolt will be limited to 85kW and LEAFs are limited to a measly 40kW. If the situation were different with lots of cars capable of utilizing high-power charging then I might be agreeing with you.
Even if you speculate that Tesla found existing standard unsuitable, it is not how you do things if you want vehicle charging concept to succeed. You make your own much better standard, and make it public, maybe patent it and charge reasonable fees, but allow everybody interested to use the standard and network and not just fragment market for foreseeable future.
That's what Tesla did. Tesla's charging standard is open for other automakers and it was offered to SAE working group. They were not interested.
Any link about supercharging network unification? American version should go away then as it doesn't have enough conductors for 3-phase charging that is needed in Europe. I would imagine it would cost a fortune if they do right thing and change equipment everywhere in the US. And you know, European Tesla plug is bigger.
Retrofitting existing superchargers won't cost too much, especially if they distribute adapters among the existing Tesla customers first. Or do a retrofit during the regular service.
As for the adapters. See, you have no problems carrying Chademo adapter and using Chademo network built by other people, most charger owners don't make issue about it, even if you with your big battery may be blocking slower charger for a long time. But nobody from outside can use Tesla network. Don't you find something wrong in such approach?
Certainly not. Every time I charge at ChADeMo stations I also pay a fee, often quite steep (the most recent 30kWH charge up at Astoria, OR cost me $32). But superchargers are free for Tesla owners since they are essentially priced into the car's cost.
I don't see how Tesla cares more than others. Sure they have some limited network that allows cross country travel if you go the way that is available. But so what, other players don't need cross country travel, they didn't make long range EVs until recently as they found price would be prohibitive.
It's remarkable how you can contradict yourself in just two sentences.
Ken Cuccinelli received money from Koch-affiliated companies ( http://www.huffingtonpost.com/... ). It was not just "political support". RICO is spot-on.
Actually, Amazon _is_ suitable for medical data. It complies with all the HIPAA regulations and can sign a BAA with an organization willing to use Amazon services for sensitive data ( https://aws.amazon.com/ru/comp... ).
Of course, nothing can prevent a clueless operator from putting data on a publicly accessible share.
Confirmed! Yes, you're an idiot. A five second googling would have gave you the answer to your question. Apparently, you're too stupid for that.
Let me put it in an analogy that might just be understandable to you. If you go to Las Vegas and play dice all night then you'll lose all of your money - that's a climate model. I don't need to forecast each dice throw (weather model) to know it.
Just because some of what has happened to Mann is undeserved, doesn't justify abuse of the law.
I don't see any abuse. RICO was designed to combat mafias that could bring immense legal resources to protect its interests by creating intolerably hostile environment and by insulating the the actual decision-makers against any responsibility.
The real solution here is to note that all these ridiculous interventions in the science and policy decision making are wholly inappropriate, whether they come from 20 clueless scientists, you, or an attorney general from Virginia.
So you're saying that we should just "note" it, shrug and move on? Yeah, that'll teach 'em!
When your opposition is lavishly funded by billionaires and directly controls an attorney general's mouth, using it to launch multiple fishing expeditions about you, hires private detectives to find your dirty laundry and brings your work to a standstill by tons of frivolous FOIA requests - you might start thinking differently.
And yes, that's all happened to Mann. RICO is completely appropriate here.
Since RICO can (by design!) be used in situations where one party has a huge disparity in access to resources, I fully support the law. In fact, RICO principles should be extended to allow fair trials for everybody.
Chademo plug geometry allows up to 200 A, likely more if you use different alloy to handle higher temperature. It means 80kW at 400V or 160kW at 800V.
Except that Tesla connectors were actually designed for 200kW at 400V. They are doing 150kW _right_ _now_ in Europe (not in some uncertain future) and are experimenting with liquid-cooled cables in the US.
So let's see, there was no approved standard when Tesla was developing its superchargers and the eventually approved standard is extremely shitty (the plugs are heavy, unreliable and don't allow for enough power).
Exactly. Some shitty "standard" was invented by German/US automakers to drag down Japanese EVs. Some FUD was spread that competitors are "deprecated" and it worked, you repeat it now. Tesla had option to use common open standard at that time and CCS may be not have happened.
I actually work with guys who were involved in the SAE plug design. They have some choice words about it. For example, the SAE plug uses a complete TCP/IP stack over a custom PHY layer.
I don't think they sell such adapter, and I wouldn't be sure they would start charging when VIN from other region would be sent to supercharger, and you already may be carrying a dozen different adapters in your trunk or frunk. What a hassle.
Tesla said that the supercharging network will be unified across the continents. As for dozens adapters - yes, I actually carry a "frankencable" for charging and a ChADeMO adapter.
It is called abuse in my book but as the are trying "to save the world" they are entitled to do anything in they eyes of their fans. Most evil things in the human history were done by people fighting "for greater good".
Nissan has it's own network for LEAFs. They should have called it "Charge for Sure(tm)". So I'd like to _eventually_ see collaboration between auto vendors. However, right now there is only ONE vendor that actually cares about providing fast charging. BTW, Tesla had actually offered their technology to BMW and SAE - and was rebuffed.
There were no cars capable of 250k charging and the standard itself is limited to 80kW, so it was a stunt only. I have no idea where you got the 2008 date, the official international ChADeMO standard was released in 2011 ( http://www.iec.ch/dyn/www/f?p=... ). And anyway, it's being deprecated in favor of another shitty standard (from SAE this time).
And no, Tesla network do not use one standard. In Europe and China their plug is completely different and not compatible with American version.
They are not completely different. They just use different wiring arrangements and can be adapted by a simple wiring adapter.
Model S are prevented from use superchargers as they check VIN when you plug in. Do you really want to say all this is good business ethics?
Since Tesla actually foots the electricity bills and funds the network rollout - that's perfectly fine. Also, superchargers are more powerful than ANY of the deployed standards out there right now.
Tesla charger infrastructure had been designed _before_ ChADeMo was finalized. And it is superior to it - the official standard is still limited to 80kW, far cry from Tesla's 150kW. Never mind the fact that Tesla actually has a far superior plug.
Oh, and Tesla network uses one standard everywhere - some superchargers in Europe are simply more powerful.
We won't have to give you paychecks for your disability for the rest of your life. And I'm 100% sure that you'll come whining for disability payments even in case of your own negligence leading to it. Just like any other libertarian (including Ayn Rand).
Sure. Nobody forces you to stay in the society. If you object to traffic laws then don't drive on public roads. Easy enough, isn't it? Or you can move to another country without traffic laws (might I suggest Pakistan or Somalia?).
Slashdot Mirror
Easy. See here: https://www2.ucar.edu/news/how...
So now that the question of successful predictions is settled, are you going to start campaigning for clean energy? Since you're such a believer in science then surely a confirmed prediction is enough to convince you?
How about the very basic one - the rising average global temperature?
I just picked gold because it is usually a good indicator and generally recognized as such: It has little use except as a store of value (even when being used in jewelry) and its production costs don't vary much
No, it's not. It's a regular commodity with a price determined mainly by fear and gullibility of the folks. By choosing a period it can be used to justify anything. For example, let's compare price of a can of Diet Coke at Jul 24, 2011. Costco says that it was $5.75 for a 4-pack, so that translates to 320 4-packs of Diet Coke per ounce of gold (price $1837.8 per troy ounce). Today Costco sells the same Coke for $5.87 for a 4-pack - and that translates to 196 packs of Diet Coke per ounce of gold (closing price today is $1146 per troy ounce).
OMGWTF!!@#!111 We have a huge inflation, run for cover!!!11111
But if we instead choose 31 Dec, 2006 when the price was $545 per troy ounce (or 98 cases of Diet Coke), then we have a huge _de_flation.
So the best way to calculate the size of the US bond market is to use the currency in which it is nominated - the US dollar. The market grew, without any trust problems.
Ad hominem. I win.
No, you don't. You're terminally diseased and will die soon of brain explosion. It's been almost 10 years and there's still no hyperinflation in sight.
I consider gold to be "stable money" for looking at REAL inflation (as opposed to things like the consumer price index, which has been politically hacked of late to make inflation look small and inflation-"corrected" entitlement payments lower.)
Ok. Let's look at the real inflation measured by directly checking the prices of a wide variety of services and goods: http://bpp.mit.edu/usa/ - inflation is actually below the target rate.
Oh, but I see. You're a goldbugger (i.e. you have a load of bug instead of brain). Sorry, can't be helped. But don't worry, you'll die pretty soon of terminal cognitive dissonance.
One result of this is that, thanks to the government, the US bond market is no longer considered a good investment, because the government now has a track record of changing the rules, when trouble arises
Lemmesee... US bond market in 2007: 36 trillions, US bond market size in 2015: 41 trillions. Yeah, investors surely lost all hope in the US bond market.
In the _actual_ reality, bondholders were given a much sweeter deal than they could have hoped for without government intervention. A firesale of all assets would have resulted in them getting pretty much nothing at all.
As for unions and workers getting their due before the bondholders - I fail to see issues there. Bondholders are paid interest because they are taking the risk, workers are paid because they actually do the work.
The problem is, you CAN NOT get an approval for an alternative generic. This shitty fucktard invoked an FDA clause allowing this company to use "closed distribution". I.e. this company can pick and choose to which customers it sells the drug in exchange for discounted pricing.
Why does it matter? - To market a generic drug you need to show that it's equivalent to an existing drug. And Turing can block any such clinical study - a classic Catch-22. This loophole should be fixed, but given the dysfunctional state of the Congress any bill fixing this will probably be encumbered with a prohibition on abortions and more NSA spying.
At the point where government officials abuse the policy and the "watchdogs" nod and grin.
"Not interested" means the proposal had too many hooks attached or nothing was valuable in that Tesla protocol.
Really? Nothing interesting in the only charging standard that actually is doing 150kW charging _right_ _now_? Sure.
If Tesla really wants to open it, it should 1) publish it
Telsa pledged to open the standard for anyone interested.
2) allow non-discriminatory third party EV access to their network based on reasonable per-use fee to recoup costs. Otherwise it is just lip service to look good and pump price of shares for next raise of capital.
Nope. This requirement has NOTHING to do with standards - it's perfectly possible to use open standards for private networks. For example, Nissan's dealer ChADeMO network is open for Nissan only.
The point is that Tesla makes its network available to their customers only, it is useless for non-Tesla EVs. At the same time Tesla uses other networks. Not so nice word about would be leaching.
Except that there are NO OTHER CARS that can fully utilize Tesla superchargers. None. Chevy Bolt will be limited to 85kW and LEAFs are limited to a measly 40kW. If the situation were different with lots of cars capable of utilizing high-power charging then I might be agreeing with you.
Even if you speculate that Tesla found existing standard unsuitable, it is not how you do things if you want vehicle charging concept to succeed. You make your own much better standard, and make it public, maybe patent it and charge reasonable fees, but allow everybody interested to use the standard and network and not just fragment market for foreseeable future.
That's what Tesla did. Tesla's charging standard is open for other automakers and it was offered to SAE working group. They were not interested.
Any link about supercharging network unification? American version should go away then as it doesn't have enough conductors for 3-phase charging that is needed in Europe. I would imagine it would cost a fortune if they do right thing and change equipment everywhere in the US. And you know, European Tesla plug is bigger.
Retrofitting existing superchargers won't cost too much, especially if they distribute adapters among the existing Tesla customers first. Or do a retrofit during the regular service.
As for the adapters. See, you have no problems carrying Chademo adapter and using Chademo network built by other people, most charger owners don't make issue about it, even if you with your big battery may be blocking slower charger for a long time. But nobody from outside can use Tesla network. Don't you find something wrong in such approach?
Certainly not. Every time I charge at ChADeMo stations I also pay a fee, often quite steep (the most recent 30kWH charge up at Astoria, OR cost me $32). But superchargers are free for Tesla owners since they are essentially priced into the car's cost.
I don't see how Tesla cares more than others. Sure they have some limited network that allows cross country travel if you go the way that is available. But so what, other players don't need cross country travel, they didn't make long range EVs until recently as they found price would be prohibitive.
It's remarkable how you can contradict yourself in just two sentences.
Ken Cuccinelli received money from Koch-affiliated companies ( http://www.huffingtonpost.com/... ). It was not just "political support". RICO is spot-on.
Actually, Amazon _is_ suitable for medical data. It complies with all the HIPAA regulations and can sign a BAA with an organization willing to use Amazon services for sensitive data ( https://aws.amazon.com/ru/comp... ).
Of course, nothing can prevent a clueless operator from putting data on a publicly accessible share.
Confirmed! Yes, you're an idiot. A five second googling would have gave you the answer to your question. Apparently, you're too stupid for that.
Let me put it in an analogy that might just be understandable to you. If you go to Las Vegas and play dice all night then you'll lose all of your money - that's a climate model. I don't need to forecast each dice throw (weather model) to know it.
Just because some of what has happened to Mann is undeserved, doesn't justify abuse of the law.
I don't see any abuse. RICO was designed to combat mafias that could bring immense legal resources to protect its interests by creating intolerably hostile environment and by insulating the the actual decision-makers against any responsibility.
The real solution here is to note that all these ridiculous interventions in the science and policy decision making are wholly inappropriate, whether they come from 20 clueless scientists, you, or an attorney general from Virginia.
So you're saying that we should just "note" it, shrug and move on? Yeah, that'll teach 'em!
When your opposition is lavishly funded by billionaires and directly controls an attorney general's mouth, using it to launch multiple fishing expeditions about you, hires private detectives to find your dirty laundry and brings your work to a standstill by tons of frivolous FOIA requests - you might start thinking differently.
And yes, that's all happened to Mann. RICO is completely appropriate here.
Since RICO can (by design!) be used in situations where one party has a huge disparity in access to resources, I fully support the law. In fact, RICO principles should be extended to allow fair trials for everybody.
You know that you're an idiot, don't you? _Climate_ models are not used to predict the _weather_.
Chademo plug geometry allows up to 200 A, likely more if you use different alloy to handle higher temperature. It means 80kW at 400V or 160kW at 800V.
Except that Tesla connectors were actually designed for 200kW at 400V. They are doing 150kW _right_ _now_ in Europe (not in some uncertain future) and are experimenting with liquid-cooled cables in the US.
So let's see, there was no approved standard when Tesla was developing its superchargers and the eventually approved standard is extremely shitty (the plugs are heavy, unreliable and don't allow for enough power).
Exactly. Some shitty "standard" was invented by German/US automakers to drag down Japanese EVs. Some FUD was spread that competitors are "deprecated" and it worked, you repeat it now. Tesla had option to use common open standard at that time and CCS may be not have happened.
I actually work with guys who were involved in the SAE plug design. They have some choice words about it. For example, the SAE plug uses a complete TCP/IP stack over a custom PHY layer.
I don't think they sell such adapter, and I wouldn't be sure they would start charging when VIN from other region would be sent to supercharger, and you already may be carrying a dozen different adapters in your trunk or frunk. What a hassle.
Tesla said that the supercharging network will be unified across the continents. As for dozens adapters - yes, I actually carry a "frankencable" for charging and a ChADeMO adapter.
It is called abuse in my book but as the are trying "to save the world" they are entitled to do anything in they eyes of their fans. Most evil things in the human history were done by people fighting "for greater good".
Nissan has it's own network for LEAFs. They should have called it "Charge for Sure(tm)". So I'd like to _eventually_ see collaboration between auto vendors. However, right now there is only ONE vendor that actually cares about providing fast charging. BTW, Tesla had actually offered their technology to BMW and SAE - and was rebuffed.
And no, Tesla network do not use one standard. In Europe and China their plug is completely different and not compatible with American version.
They are not completely different. They just use different wiring arrangements and can be adapted by a simple wiring adapter.
Model S are prevented from use superchargers as they check VIN when you plug in. Do you really want to say all this is good business ethics?
Since Tesla actually foots the electricity bills and funds the network rollout - that's perfectly fine. Also, superchargers are more powerful than ANY of the deployed standards out there right now.
Tesla charger infrastructure had been designed _before_ ChADeMo was finalized. And it is superior to it - the official standard is still limited to 80kW, far cry from Tesla's 150kW. Never mind the fact that Tesla actually has a far superior plug.
Oh, and Tesla network uses one standard everywhere - some superchargers in Europe are simply more powerful.
Tesla does 300Amps at 400Volts at superchargers, right now. Yes, that's a really scary amount of power.
Some drones do this automatically. For example, the most popular one: http://www.dji.com/fly-safe/ca...
We won't have to give you paychecks for your disability for the rest of your life. And I'm 100% sure that you'll come whining for disability payments even in case of your own negligence leading to it. Just like any other libertarian (including Ayn Rand).
Sure. Nobody forces you to stay in the society. If you object to traffic laws then don't drive on public roads. Easy enough, isn't it? Or you can move to another country without traffic laws (might I suggest Pakistan or Somalia?).
It _does_ detect muons from cosmic ray interaction with the atmosphere, which are easily distinguished from neutrinos.