That argument is predicated on assumptions. Even in a mandatory recall, that's not mandatory. So if they are recalled to be "broken" by the fix, simply don't take your car in.
And what are the damages? 100% of the car's value in damages if the performance is 1% below rated? Does this apply to an individual who got a lemon, or only apply to a large issue?
I still don't see actual damages. Are these being tested by CA and ruled illegal? If not, then #1 in the argument is false, removing any damages at all, and a lie with no damages isn't fraud, it's just a lie.
They (government bureaucrats, politicians) either lied or were naive (your choice) when crafting that law.
Why? Other countries with a SSN analog do not have the problems of the US SSN. It's a problem particular to the USA, and caused by the private companies using the SSN as a UID for *everything* and a password as well, in many cases.
Thank you to all the liberals who can't see the forest because of the tree.
Nope, it's the conservative businessmen who perverted the SSN who caused the problem. The many countries with an SSN analog don't have the same issue, but they are called "socialist" by US standards. They also enforced the "government only" use of the SSN.
You all don't care about liberty as long as you get your "free" stuff from the "one percent"
The "one percent" gets more free stuff from the government than I do.
I think VW didn't sell the Caddy under that name in the US because the name was already taken in the US. As this site, this article and the EPA are all about the US, I used the US terminology.
SSN is explicitly insecure, and not personally identifying. It's the private companies misusing it that's the problem, not the government using the tax ID as a tax ID. Your anger is misplaced.
The fines are written off and the share value drops after a fine, but usually quickly recovers. I like the idea someone else came up with of fining the corporation in stock dilution. The stock will be worth a smaller portion of the company, causing a "fine" directly on the shareholders.
And capitalism existed before corporations and the limited liability they provide, it just wasn't so large and disconnected from the consequences of its actions.
But you are too stupid to find the content without commercials? That's a very narrow band of stupid. About 90 to 95 IQ I'd say. I've seen it and never paid to see a commercial in my life. And I wasn't even trying.
None. If the investigation turns up something, the information will be sealed. Nothing will make it to you and me about who ordered the alteration, and how it worked. I suspect that EPA tests will be declared National Security issues before it's all over. Nothing gets shared with us.
That one with Caddy in the '90s? No criminal charges. They programmed the ECU to recognize the test cycle and modify the programming to game the test. Similar to the issue here, but not exactly.
They shipped what was tested. If your daily driving happened to match the test cycle exactly, it was theoretically possible to trigger the hidden code, but in practice, it probably never happened.
Clinton looked the other way while the Rwanda genocide happened.
The Republicans said to not get involved, then bashed him for doing what they asked. So when Somalia came up, he did get involved, and was bashed for getting involved. That you bring that up labels you a party hack. Clinton was evil for not sending Americans to their deaths to stabilize an African country, and Clinton was evil for sending Americans to their deaths in Somalia trying to stabilize an African country.
Like any good spinner, you try to be fair and balanced, while being neither. I've voted in every election since '92, and never a winner. So you can't blame me for not voting, and you can't blame me for voting in the idiot who screwed things up. Still not sure who to vote for in '16. The choices aren't set. I may break my streak and, for the first time ever, vote for a winner. Now I'm curious. I've voted in every primary I was eligible for as well, and I think I've also never voted for a winner there, but I hadn't thought about it until just now. The choices are always so bad, primary and election.
Is Obama's increase more than Bush's increase over Clinton? Evil isn't just an absolute, but also the move towards absolute evil. If Bush moved us there faster than Obama, then wouldn't that be more evil?
It's funny because it's true. I get modded down all the time, from both sides. I'm a classic liberal, and that makes me hated by both sides, and the anarcho-capitalists who call themselves "libertarian". Though classic liberal is centrist by US political standards, just not the right kind.
Given that you are raging about Obama and not Bush, you've proven your own statement wrong.
I see that Slashdot is much more anti-Obama than anti-Bush. But then, I was here in the Bush years, and watched the support as he did those things in real time. The same consistent support here has never gone towards Obama.
The investors are capable of losing all their interest in the company. That wouldn't be a bad thing when the company does really bad things. The major shareholders usually have significant control of the company (Ford and VW being two where major shareholders are also employees or directors with direct control of such activities). Yeah, the guy with two shares gets screwed, but he invested in a criminal corporation, he's supposed to lose up to his entire investment.
But we talk about bailing out the investment holders while paying trillions to the corporate investors and family-held corporations. Fining VW a 30% issuance of stock in the name of the US government would be a fair and just punishment for this. Nobody will lose any money. The investors will see their investment drop in value, but that's not "money". And it will punish a corporation in accordance with their shady business practices. Seems like a win-win to me.
The solution to this is to have all phones (iPhones and Androids) offer "Accept", "Deny" and "Lie" permissions. Per permission, allow all three. Currently, the setup is you accept or deny the app, but have no choice for permissions. The change should be that you can deny a permission. Deny "contacts" to a game that should never need them, and the game makers will decide whether they'll install with any permissions denied. There should be a difference between "asked for" and "required". And, in either case, allow "lie" as an answer. A contacts list that's blank (or randomized fakes). I can do most of this on Android without too much trouble, but some is harder than others, and none of it is available on iOS. Let me accept a permissions demanding app (that I probably shouldn't be running), then sandbox it with fakes for all the invasive permissions it demands.
This is not that difficult, although people on here certainly have problems with it.
That's what I said, and you disagreed. Perhaps the problem with everyone else's understanding is not with them, but with you. Stock value is mostly meaningless to a company. It matters most at an IPO, and if there are sales or buy-backs of stock, but in general it's irrelevant (aside from some minor secondary effects, like affecting bond ratings and such).
The actions of the company of course affects the share price, but regardless of whether the price goes up or down the company has no claim on any individuals shares.
Where did I say anything that would in any way imply anything contrary to your statement? I think the only difficult thing here is your reading comprehension.
Given that the tests were "faked" in software, it should be trivial to force that code to run 100% of the time. That would give them the specs they paid for. Though some would probably say it results in behavior that doesn't match their test drive.
Expect a very costly class action from customers who didn't get what was promised.
Damages in that class action will be for verifiable losses. What's the provable loss for someone who bought a car and found out later than it emitted 3% more NOx than advertised? (yes, I made up numbers, just so we'd have a point of discussion) The court would likely rule that no individual owner is harmed by the increased emissions. With the Caddy case, they made them buy pollution credits, and didn't modify the cars or pay out the owner.
The bar has been set. I don't expect it to move for this case.
Ultimately, accelerating that flow of reaction mass by a given amount takes more power as the initial velocity of that reaction mass with respect to the craft increases. The only way around this is to not breathe air.
A supersonic ramjet doesn't slow the air down to subsonic, like running a conventional turbine at high speed does. So breathe air, just don't slow it down.
I took a domestic 60 minute flight for a while. 1 hour to the airport (rarely are they convenient, but are all on the outskirts of town, I'm on the wrong side). 5 minute check in, 5 minutes security, 5 minute walk to gate, sit at the gate for 20+ minutes (even with less than 15 minutes from edge of airport to gate, check in still closes 30 minutes before the flight). 60 minute flight. 5 minutes to get to luggage carousel, 5 minutes to get bag, 0 minutes for taxi, 15-30 minutes to destination. Train for the same destination is about 8 hours, drive is 12+ hours.
But when I worked a place with offices in Dallas and Houston, I'd drive. I was the only one in the company who regularly drove it. Everyone else flew. The time office-to-office was about the same either way.
Slashdot Mirror
That argument is predicated on assumptions. Even in a mandatory recall, that's not mandatory. So if they are recalled to be "broken" by the fix, simply don't take your car in.
And what are the damages? 100% of the car's value in damages if the performance is 1% below rated? Does this apply to an individual who got a lemon, or only apply to a large issue?
I still don't see actual damages. Are these being tested by CA and ruled illegal? If not, then #1 in the argument is false, removing any damages at all, and a lie with no damages isn't fraud, it's just a lie.
They (government bureaucrats, politicians) either lied or were naive (your choice) when crafting that law.
Why? Other countries with a SSN analog do not have the problems of the US SSN. It's a problem particular to the USA, and caused by the private companies using the SSN as a UID for *everything* and a password as well, in many cases.
Thank you to all the liberals who can't see the forest because of the tree.
Nope, it's the conservative businessmen who perverted the SSN who caused the problem. The many countries with an SSN analog don't have the same issue, but they are called "socialist" by US standards. They also enforced the "government only" use of the SSN.
You all don't care about liberty as long as you get your "free" stuff from the "one percent"
The "one percent" gets more free stuff from the government than I do.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I think VW didn't sell the Caddy under that name in the US because the name was already taken in the US. As this site, this article and the EPA are all about the US, I used the US terminology.
SSN is explicitly insecure, and not personally identifying. It's the private companies misusing it that's the problem, not the government using the tax ID as a tax ID. Your anger is misplaced.
Caddy is short for "Cadillac". Why do you bother posting a link when you didn't read mine? Or are you just trolling me?
The fines are written off and the share value drops after a fine, but usually quickly recovers. I like the idea someone else came up with of fining the corporation in stock dilution. The stock will be worth a smaller portion of the company, causing a "fine" directly on the shareholders.
And capitalism existed before corporations and the limited liability they provide, it just wasn't so large and disconnected from the consequences of its actions.
But you are too stupid to find the content without commercials? That's a very narrow band of stupid. About 90 to 95 IQ I'd say. I've seen it and never paid to see a commercial in my life. And I wasn't even trying.
Wonder how much of the truth will come out.
None. If the investigation turns up something, the information will be sealed. Nothing will make it to you and me about who ordered the alteration, and how it worked. I suspect that EPA tests will be declared National Security issues before it's all over. Nothing gets shared with us.
Who was defrauded, and what were the damages?
http://www.nytimes.com/1995/12...
That one with Caddy in the '90s? No criminal charges. They programmed the ECU to recognize the test cycle and modify the programming to game the test. Similar to the issue here, but not exactly.
They shipped what was tested. If your daily driving happened to match the test cycle exactly, it was theoretically possible to trigger the hidden code, but in practice, it probably never happened.
Clinton looked the other way while the Rwanda genocide happened.
The Republicans said to not get involved, then bashed him for doing what they asked. So when Somalia came up, he did get involved, and was bashed for getting involved. That you bring that up labels you a party hack. Clinton was evil for not sending Americans to their deaths to stabilize an African country, and Clinton was evil for sending Americans to their deaths in Somalia trying to stabilize an African country.
Like any good spinner, you try to be fair and balanced, while being neither. I've voted in every election since '92, and never a winner. So you can't blame me for not voting, and you can't blame me for voting in the idiot who screwed things up. Still not sure who to vote for in '16. The choices aren't set. I may break my streak and, for the first time ever, vote for a winner. Now I'm curious. I've voted in every primary I was eligible for as well, and I think I've also never voted for a winner there, but I hadn't thought about it until just now. The choices are always so bad, primary and election.
It helps the poor, and we hate the poor. If they didn't deserve it, they wouldn't be poor.
Is Obama's increase more than Bush's increase over Clinton? Evil isn't just an absolute, but also the move towards absolute evil. If Bush moved us there faster than Obama, then wouldn't that be more evil?
It's funny because it's true. I get modded down all the time, from both sides. I'm a classic liberal, and that makes me hated by both sides, and the anarcho-capitalists who call themselves "libertarian". Though classic liberal is centrist by US political standards, just not the right kind.
Given that you are raging about Obama and not Bush, you've proven your own statement wrong.
I see that Slashdot is much more anti-Obama than anti-Bush. But then, I was here in the Bush years, and watched the support as he did those things in real time. The same consistent support here has never gone towards Obama.
The investors are capable of losing all their interest in the company. That wouldn't be a bad thing when the company does really bad things. The major shareholders usually have significant control of the company (Ford and VW being two where major shareholders are also employees or directors with direct control of such activities). Yeah, the guy with two shares gets screwed, but he invested in a criminal corporation, he's supposed to lose up to his entire investment.
But we talk about bailing out the investment holders while paying trillions to the corporate investors and family-held corporations. Fining VW a 30% issuance of stock in the name of the US government would be a fair and just punishment for this. Nobody will lose any money. The investors will see their investment drop in value, but that's not "money". And it will punish a corporation in accordance with their shady business practices. Seems like a win-win to me.
Was at the time. Do you not know who GM is?
The solution to this is to have all phones (iPhones and Androids) offer "Accept", "Deny" and "Lie" permissions. Per permission, allow all three. Currently, the setup is you accept or deny the app, but have no choice for permissions. The change should be that you can deny a permission. Deny "contacts" to a game that should never need them, and the game makers will decide whether they'll install with any permissions denied. There should be a difference between "asked for" and "required". And, in either case, allow "lie" as an answer. A contacts list that's blank (or randomized fakes). I can do most of this on Android without too much trouble, but some is harder than others, and none of it is available on iOS. Let me accept a permissions demanding app (that I probably shouldn't be running), then sandbox it with fakes for all the invasive permissions it demands.
This is not that difficult, although people on here certainly have problems with it.
That's what I said, and you disagreed. Perhaps the problem with everyone else's understanding is not with them, but with you. Stock value is mostly meaningless to a company. It matters most at an IPO, and if there are sales or buy-backs of stock, but in general it's irrelevant (aside from some minor secondary effects, like affecting bond ratings and such).
The actions of the company of course affects the share price, but regardless of whether the price goes up or down the company has no claim on any individuals shares.
Where did I say anything that would in any way imply anything contrary to your statement? I think the only difficult thing here is your reading comprehension.
Expect a very costly class action from customers who didn't get what was promised.
Damages in that class action will be for verifiable losses. What's the provable loss for someone who bought a car and found out later than it emitted 3% more NOx than advertised? (yes, I made up numbers, just so we'd have a point of discussion) The court would likely rule that no individual owner is harmed by the increased emissions. With the Caddy case, they made them buy pollution credits, and didn't modify the cars or pay out the owner.
The bar has been set. I don't expect it to move for this case.
Maybe if the shareholders were held responsible for things like this, then they'd pick managers less likely to endorse such behavior.
Sonic booms from low earth orbit are silent. And the rules would allow this as described without change, so no change needed.
And sonic booms don't break windows. Go watch the Mythbusters on that one.
Ultimately, accelerating that flow of reaction mass by a given amount takes more power as the initial velocity of that reaction mass with respect to the craft increases. The only way around this is to not breathe air.
A supersonic ramjet doesn't slow the air down to subsonic, like running a conventional turbine at high speed does. So breathe air, just don't slow it down.
I took a domestic 60 minute flight for a while. 1 hour to the airport (rarely are they convenient, but are all on the outskirts of town, I'm on the wrong side). 5 minute check in, 5 minutes security, 5 minute walk to gate, sit at the gate for 20+ minutes (even with less than 15 minutes from edge of airport to gate, check in still closes 30 minutes before the flight). 60 minute flight. 5 minutes to get to luggage carousel, 5 minutes to get bag, 0 minutes for taxi, 15-30 minutes to destination. Train for the same destination is about 8 hours, drive is 12+ hours.
But when I worked a place with offices in Dallas and Houston, I'd drive. I was the only one in the company who regularly drove it. Everyone else flew. The time office-to-office was about the same either way.
Supersonic at high enough altitudes will be inaudible. That's what I've seen the proposed services of this kind counting on.