Thirty minutes is ridiculous. That is not "rapid" ANYTHING.
To be fair, the electric model is that most of the time you'll top up overnight (OK, that raises its own issues), and the only time you'll need a charging station is if you're on a road trip, in which case a 30 minute refreshment and potty break every couple of hundred miles isn't such a bad thing.
If, however, there is widespread uptake of electric cars, then it will start to become apparent that, even with demand reduced by home charging, you need one hell of a lot of 6-bay superchargers to match the throughput of a 6-bay gas station (especially since people who e.g. head off for a meal are going to leave their cars plugged in for more than 30 mins). You'd need entire parking lots kitted out with chargers - which, in turn, is going to start needing extra infrastructure to get the power to the site (...perhaps they could run a generator off those nice big tanks at the gas station?:-) ). The trick for the e-car industry is going to be to avoid the crunch point when people start to roll up at the supercharger and find all the bays in use (and no owners in sight) and don't have enough juice to get to the next one.
I know Tesla has a battery pack replacement service, but it really needs to be affordable and streamlined and not require expensive robotics.
I saw the video of Tesla's battery changer, and it certainly seems preferable to a 30 minute recharge. With the weight of battery packs, and the need to build them in to the chassis to save space, I think robotics is probably the only way. Also, its probably too soon in the development of battery technology to introduce a 'standard' pack - maybe a split system whereby part of the battery capacity is in a replaceable, standardised, pack, and the rest is built into the chassis...
NOBODY wants to wait thirty minutes for "rapid recharge." The money spent on this infrastructure should, instead, be spent on optimizing the use of hydrogen fuel cells. They are the ultimate battery and they don't wear out.
Except you can't refill your hydrogen fuel cell at home - so you're going to be straight in to the chicken-and-egg problem of needing the full refueling infrastructure in place before people buy the cars. Unless maybe you have a plug-in/fuel cell hybrid?
Lets face it - the ideal use-case for an electric car is as a and still need another one for long trips. I quite like the look of the BMW i3 (it would probably suit my purposes, as the UK range-extender version hasn't been gimped to suit CA law) but, again, you could buy 3 small city cars, or a fully tricked-out Mini with gold-plated hubcaps and unicorn-fur upholstery for the price of the basic model.
Meanwhile, I've done my bit for the promotion of electric vehicles and bought one of these.
It produces Bt, which is toxic to certain orders of insects, not to humans.
The problem isn't killing off a few humans. Plenty more where they came from. Disrupting ecosystems due to unintended consequences could be far more destructive.
E.g. Transfer natural insecticide "X" from plant Q to plant P, insect A (that had never encountered plant Q) eats P and accumulates X; insect B eats insect A and dies from X, is no longer around to eat insect C, which swarms and displaces insect D, which had an essential role in pollenating crop S...
Of course, X could get transferred from plant Q to P naturally or by old-fangled horticulture - but this will happen gradually, even horticulture will probably take decades, giving ecosystems time to adapt, but GM can make the transfer and roll out the GMO around the world within a few years. Plus, with GM, X might come from a plant from another continent, a seaweed, a jellyfish...
Now, if we could only be sure that the firms making GMO crops were painstakingly exploring all possible ecological side effects, and would scrap a new product at the first hint of any possible problem on a "better safe than sorry" basis, then the benefits of GMO might outweigh the risks. Unfortunately, these are probably the same people who thought that putting diseased sheeps' brains into cattle feed was a good idea, who are resisting attempts to ban neonicatinoids until its absolutely 100% proven beyond all doubt that they're killing bees, and think a 1m strip of ploughed land around a GMO trial field will prevent cross-pollenation.
Plus, as others have pointed out, the problems of food supply are caused by poor infrastructure, overpopulation, growing high-value crops for 1st-world markets instead of food and over-reliance on single crops. These are not generally helped by increasing yields in the already-overproducing rich nations who can afford to buy GMOs.
I am currently in the office attempting to work, so I am unable to post a funny, informative or insightful comment on this story. I expect to be goofing off again in an hour or so at which time I will give your story my full attention.
Why would anyone give their credit card info to some random app?
They don't. "In-App purchases" are charged to your Apple Store/ Google Play/Amazon/whatever account. There are APIs to enable this.
You usually have to give your password for this to happen... but there are various gotchas such as a 15-minute window during which you don't have to re-enter your password and other design flaws e.g. asking for your password even for free apps.
So, scenario: Little Johnny asks Daddy to enter password to install free, or maybe 50c game. Daddy checks that game is, indeed $0.50 and enters password, 10 minutes later, Daddy has left the room and little Johnny is asked if he wants to buy 1000 magic berries for $10... and doesn't need a password.
Then, you've got games which mix in-app purchases with real money and an in-app imaginary currency just for good measure...
Could someone explain this to me with a car analogy?
Someone invents the Star Trek Matter Replicator.
So, rather than take your new car out and get it dirty, you run it through the replicator to make a working copy for day-to-day driving and keep the original in the garage. While your at it, you make another copy for your Significant Other so that they can (according to their inclination) fill up the footwells with high-heeled shoes and/or dismantle it and leave bits strewn around the house without bothering you, and one for each of your 3 kids, and one for your mate Bob (in return for the speedboat that they let you copy last month).
Ford then sues the replicator manufacturer, basing their damages on the theory that obviously if you hadn't had the replicator you'd have bought seven cars off them instead of one.
Meanwhile, Paramount reveals that it applied for patents for everything in Star Trek in 1969 and, by continually updating the applications to involve more sex and lens flare, they're still valid, so they're suing as well.
Really guys, you update it but you do nothing about the processor or amount of RAM?!
Seriously, what do you expect for $35? They've done well to add the extra USB without raising the price (and, hopefully, removed the need to buy a powered USB hub which was the real dealbreaker with the old Pi).
The stated aim of the Pi was to always encourage people to muck around with programming and electronics without the risk of bricking an expensive PC. Its quite deliberately built down to a price, so letting the magic smoke out is never a big deal.
Devices like the Hummingboard and the BeagleBone Black (which probably wouldn't have existed without the success of the Pi) look great, but they already cost ~30% more.
What is next, blame Ford because your kid was able to steal your keys off your dresser and wreck the car while you are sleeping?
...if Ford made the key fob in the shape of a cartoon character with a voice chip that kept saying "Hey kids! Pick me up and lets go for a drive" then, maybe.
Yes, parents should take responsibility for their kids - but that doesn't give businesses the right to exploit their slightest lapse.
If you actually had one, you'd be aware where the superchargers within 100 miles of you are
I've looked. There isn't one.
To be fair, I live in the UK and they're only just starting to roll out. Last time I looked, the nearest one was in the Netherlands, but now there's one in London, which is about 125 miles away. However, the problem is that it is in London. With London traffic, even if your home or destination is in another part of London, that's not a lot of use. According to the Tesla site they'll have about 10 stations around England by the end of the year - but if they are likewise in the middle of major cities rather than motorway service areas they will be of limited use.
Looking at the US map, there are plenty of states with no chargers.
I've also looked at what I could do with a Leaf or something: there is actually a pretty comprehensive network of 'fast' chargers at motorway service areas, hotels etc. so in theory I could make my most common ~200 mile journey with a mid-way recharge and lunch break... except there's one small problem: these stations typically have one "fast" charger (go and have lunch) and one "slow" charger (check in to the nearest hotel). If you arrived for your charge and somebody had already plugged in and buggered off for a 4-course meal, you'd better hope that you've got enough juice to get to the next one - which means you're going to end up stopping for a top up ad every single bloody charger you pass 'just in case'.
The BMW i3 with range extender looks interesting - especially as the UK/EU version has a bigger petrol tank than the US one (which has been gimped to qualify as an EV in California) - but it costs a fortune compared with other small cars.
For fuck's sake, read your choice of the article, the summary, or the title before posting. This is a $30,000 mid-range vehicle that would fulfil, entirely, the commuting needs of a vast segment of American commuters (who don't drive long distances or haul boats or other large things).
For fuck's sake, red and comprehend your choice of the article, the summary, or the title before flaming.
Nowhere in TFA does it say that the model E will cost $30,000. Telsa say that the E will be "realistically priced" (whatever that means) against the BMW 3 series and Audi A4. Whoever wrote the summary has helpfully looked up the starting price of an Audi A4 for you.
The Tesla E hasn't been launched yet - its unclear from TFA how far advanced the design is. There's no clue what the range is going to be, but if they're using heavy materials and have less space for the battery 'less than the Tesla S' would be a good bet.
Hint: BMW 3 and Audi A4 are already premium-priced cars. The E is still going to cost more and have less utility because of range limitations.
You should offer a service: if one of us is feeling guilty about burning gas, but we're not sure if using electricity from gas, oil or nuclear, we can offset our carbon footprint by buying you a Tesla that you can run on 100% guaranteed green* Icelandic geothermal power.
(*well, all those volcanos and geysers probably pump out obscene amounts of CO2 and radioactive shit, but that's not humanity's fault and they're still gonna do that if you don't harvest the energy).
The problems start when you have to drive more than about 100 miles. Yeah, you can do 200-300 miles in a Tesla (depending on model) but then you have to start to think about things like do you need a heater/ air con/lights? Will you be able to recharge at your destination? If not, is there a supercharger en route? How much distance does that add? Hoe much time does that add?
So, forget trans-USA road trips. Just imagine a 100 mile each-way trip to a meeting somewhere (there and back in a day), with no guarantee of a power point at your destination, with no guarantee of 'goldilocks zone' weather.... and you're already worrying about range, whether there's a supercharger en. route, and having to leave an hour earlier.
That said, Tesla's fast battery swap looks like a much more practical alternative to a gas station. The 'charging station' idea doesn't scale if EVs get more popular: if you sometimes have to queue at a gas station with 15 pumps and a 5-minute turn around time, a couple of charging bays where people park and then head off for a meal just isn't going to cope.
From discussing this very solution, it seems people (At least american flesh-people) are very opposed to the notion of renting a car for the purpose of driving long-distances, or carrying large things around or just about anything.
... I'm not completely opposed to the notion of buying a "green" commuter car and renting for long trips (assuming that you live somewhere where you can get rental cars delivered at short notice in the event of a family emergency etc).
The notion I'm opposed to is buying a $70000 luxury saloon and still needing to rent another one for long-distance trips. If I bought a $50k+ car it would be precisely because I found myself making long journeys and wanted the comfort.
The Tesla S seems to have a niche for people with a home-based daily commute of, say, ~70 miles each way - long enough to justify wanting to do it in a really nice car but comfortably within the maximum range (so you could still pop out in the evening without waiting for the overnight recharge).
As for gas savings... If you're paying $70k for a new electric car when you can get a really nice gas one for $50k, a couple of k$ a year on gas is hardly a consideration. If you buy a brand new car rather than a 1-year-old one, the devaluation when you drive it off the forecourt could have kept you in gas for a couple of years...
Aperture won't run in Yosemite because Apple wants you to use the new app.
Not according to this which claims "an Apple spokesman told them" (distinct lack of "horse's mouth" links, unfortunately) that it would be updated to run on Yosemite.
I'm always amazed at what non-programmers are impressed by. Code up some major application, and... Why doesn't it have this feature? Why does it have that workflow? What kind of colorblind dyslexic idiot designed this UI? But whip up a simple script to automate some repetitive, routine task and you're a genius!
It suggests that one of these things solved a real problem that the users actually had, while the other solved problems that the developers thought the users ought to have.
A simple solution that does something useful, now, is worth 100 elegant applications that will totally revolutionise your work once they're finished... provided you completely re-arrange your practices to match the software.
So, I'm torn... freedom vs health... where do I stand?! I... think I have to go with freedom here. I *chose* to stop consuming that crap.
It doesn't have to be a dichotomy. The regulations shouldn't be on what is sold, but on how it is sold.
If someone walks up and ask for a super-gutbuster-megasize McMeal, fine - their decision. However, if someone walks up and orders a regular burger, don't try and upsell them to a larger portion. Don't offer to 'super size them' for a small amount (probably pure profit - I suspect the marginal cost of an extra squirt of syrup and another potato is a tiny proportion of the fixed cost of serving a meal), and don't have 'meal deals' that make a burger, drink and fries cheaper than just a burger and a drink*.
Also look at minimum portions (and this applies to 'better places' too, especially in the US): a Danish doesn't have to be the size of Denmark - if someone is really hungry they can buy two. A "starter" is not meant to be a full meal (calling a 10" pizza a 'flatbread' doesn't make it a starter - been there a few times!).
Even in the supermarket, why do chicken Kievs and suchlike always come in 2 packs? (and, conversely, when things do come in 'serves 1' portions, why are they 1/3 the size of the 'serves 2' version?) Why are bread rolls 60p each or £1.30 for 4?
ANS: because, one way or another, it lets businesses make more money or have a competitive edge. They're not going to change unless they are forced.
* Actually, I usually get diet cola anyway with a burger and (too much) < (too much + more), so its the unwanted fries that are the problem - yeah, I chuck them away sometimes, but its an effort: the easiest way not to eat food is not to buy it.
Reminds me of Elite of old past. While fun for a while, the similarities got boring and tedious pretty fast.
Thing is, although Elite used procedural generation, the game was about space combat, trading, piracy and smuggling with cutting edge (for the time - kids today won't understand) graphics. Things like the planet names and descriptions, and the fact there were a gazillion systems, were part of the atmosphere, not the Unique Selling Point.
Same with Minecraft - when you get fed up of exploring your effectively infinite world, there's building stuff, playing with redstone circuitry, fighting, potions, railways, breeding horses... The procedural generation is part of an ensemble. So the jury's out until we here what No Man's Sky's gameplay is like.
265 miles isn't far enough for you? You also get *free* charging at their stations.
265 miles then recharge at the nearest filling station would be fine. Hell, after 265 miles I'd be ready for an hour's break.
The reality, though, is 265 miles (assuming you're starting fully charged from your mains-equipped garage), minus x miles if you need air con, lights or heating, minus y miles detour to take in the nearest supercharger, minus z miles extra safety margin (because if you run out its a tow to the nearest supercharger) isn't quite there yet. From the map on Tesla's website, there are plenty of US states with no superchargers at all. According to the same map, there are 0 in the UK (which may be out-of-date).
Looking at the UK, there's an OK-looking network of non-super chargers (still nothing like the filling station network), but they're typically 1 regular (13A) bay + one fast charger bay. If you turn up and the fast charger is in use (with the occupants off somewhere having a meal or shopping) then you better have enough charge to get 50 miles to the next station...
Also, since the battery size is determined by the size of the car (unless you fill all the luggage space with battery), having to buy a full-size sedan just to get a > 100 mile range is a problem if you really want a compact. Personally, the Tesla is the sort of car I'd only consider if I was making regular long trips.
There's also a huge scalability problem with charging stations - a regular gas pump can fill one car every few minutes, an EV charging bay can only top-up one car every half hour but by that time the occupants will probably be staring their third Big Mac or in the mall trying on shoes. While EVs are a rarity you can get away with a couple of charging bays every 50 miles, which will probably pay for themselves by attracting wealthy Tesla owners to shops and restaurants. If they take off, you'd be talking about wiring up half the bays in the main parking lot.
I think its great that Tesla are working hard on some of these problems... I wish people wouldn't pretend that they were all solved.
(Actually, I've seen a video of Tesla's robotic quick battery swap procedure, which seems more viable for on-the-go recharges, and would be particularly sensible combined with a battery-leasing scheme).
Anti-GMO hysteria is anti-science, plain and simple. It is no different from insisting that CO2 doesn't drive global warming
Couple of important differences:
First, follow the money. Which side of each 'debate' is being bankrolled by big business?
Which side relies on "absence of evidence* is evidence of absence" and is expecting the other to "prove" its case by making firm "this is going to happen" predictions about a huge, complex, poorly understood natural system? (*and we get to choose what we mean by 'evidence')
Which side is proposing to "test" their position by forging ahead and irreversibly introducing material into the environment and seeing if any of the other sides doomsday predictions come true? You know, like continuing to pump CO2 into the atmosphere in increasing quantities, or going a head and introducing GMOs into the environment?
Which side is spouting scientifically incorrect bullshit like "CO2 is a harmless inert gas" or "We've been using GMOs for thousands of years?" (see thread above).
I'm not against GMO research provided it takes place in a sealed vat in a biologically isolated environment. Meanwhile, in Europe the problem is over-production fuelled by subsidies, and intensive farming (even without GMO) fucking up the environment. The third world is starving for a complex variety of reasons, including (but not limited to) poor infrastructure, wars, corrupt politics and some guy in Rome telling people not to use condoms. None of these problems are solved by maize resistant to one (expensive) brand of weedkiller or tomatoes with a 1-month shelf-life, especially when the end result is that your essential food crops are now (c), (r), (tm), patent-pending, copy-protected BigAgroCorp property. The amount of risk justified by these "benefits" is pretty much zero.
Slashdot Mirror
... but spending money and time does not guarantee quality.
Nor does a certificate that proves that you spent time and money on paperwork.
I, for one, welcome our new meme-studying overlords.
In Soviet Russia, memes study you!
Thirty minutes is ridiculous. That is not "rapid" ANYTHING.
To be fair, the electric model is that most of the time you'll top up overnight (OK, that raises its own issues), and the only time you'll need a charging station is if you're on a road trip, in which case a 30 minute refreshment and potty break every couple of hundred miles isn't such a bad thing.
If, however, there is widespread uptake of electric cars, then it will start to become apparent that, even with demand reduced by home charging, you need one hell of a lot of 6-bay superchargers to match the throughput of a 6-bay gas station (especially since people who e.g. head off for a meal are going to leave their cars plugged in for more than 30 mins). You'd need entire parking lots kitted out with chargers - which, in turn, is going to start needing extra infrastructure to get the power to the site (...perhaps they could run a generator off those nice big tanks at the gas station? :-) ). The trick for the e-car industry is going to be to avoid the crunch point when people start to roll up at the supercharger and find all the bays in use (and no owners in sight) and don't have enough juice to get to the next one.
I know Tesla has a battery pack replacement service, but it really needs to be affordable and streamlined and not require expensive robotics.
I saw the video of Tesla's battery changer, and it certainly seems preferable to a 30 minute recharge. With the weight of battery packs, and the need to build them in to the chassis to save space, I think robotics is probably the only way. Also, its probably too soon in the development of battery technology to introduce a 'standard' pack - maybe a split system whereby part of the battery capacity is in a replaceable, standardised, pack, and the rest is built into the chassis...
NOBODY wants to wait thirty minutes for "rapid recharge." The money spent on this infrastructure should, instead, be spent on optimizing the use of hydrogen fuel cells. They are the ultimate battery and they don't wear out.
Except you can't refill your hydrogen fuel cell at home - so you're going to be straight in to the chicken-and-egg problem of needing the full refueling infrastructure in place before people buy the cars. Unless maybe you have a plug-in/fuel cell hybrid?
Lets face it - the ideal use-case for an electric car is as a and still need another one for long trips. I quite like the look of the BMW i3 (it would probably suit my purposes, as the UK range-extender version hasn't been gimped to suit CA law) but, again, you could buy 3 small city cars, or a fully tricked-out Mini with gold-plated hubcaps and unicorn-fur upholstery for the price of the basic model.
Meanwhile, I've done my bit for the promotion of electric vehicles and bought one of these.
It produces Bt, which is toxic to certain orders of insects, not to humans.
The problem isn't killing off a few humans. Plenty more where they came from. Disrupting ecosystems due to unintended consequences could be far more destructive.
E.g. Transfer natural insecticide "X" from plant Q to plant P, insect A (that had never encountered plant Q) eats P and accumulates X; insect B eats insect A and dies from X, is no longer around to eat insect C, which swarms and displaces insect D, which had an essential role in pollenating crop S...
Of course, X could get transferred from plant Q to P naturally or by old-fangled horticulture - but this will happen gradually, even horticulture will probably take decades, giving ecosystems time to adapt, but GM can make the transfer and roll out the GMO around the world within a few years. Plus, with GM, X might come from a plant from another continent, a seaweed, a jellyfish...
Now, if we could only be sure that the firms making GMO crops were painstakingly exploring all possible ecological side effects, and would scrap a new product at the first hint of any possible problem on a "better safe than sorry" basis, then the benefits of GMO might outweigh the risks. Unfortunately, these are probably the same people who thought that putting diseased sheeps' brains into cattle feed was a good idea, who are resisting attempts to ban neonicatinoids until its absolutely 100% proven beyond all doubt that they're killing bees, and think a 1m strip of ploughed land around a GMO trial field will prevent cross-pollenation.
Plus, as others have pointed out, the problems of food supply are caused by poor infrastructure, overpopulation, growing high-value crops for 1st-world markets instead of food and over-reliance on single crops. These are not generally helped by increasing yields in the already-overproducing rich nations who can afford to buy GMOs.
Dear Slashdot,
I am currently in the office attempting to work, so I am unable to post a funny, informative or insightful comment on this story. I expect to be goofing off again in an hour or so at which time I will give your story my full attention.
Meanwhile...
Why would anyone give their credit card info to some random app?
They don't. "In-App purchases" are charged to your Apple Store/ Google Play/Amazon/whatever account. There are APIs to enable this.
You usually have to give your password for this to happen... but there are various gotchas such as a 15-minute window during which you don't have to re-enter your password and other design flaws e.g. asking for your password even for free apps.
So, scenario: Little Johnny asks Daddy to enter password to install free, or maybe 50c game. Daddy checks that game is, indeed $0.50 and enters password, 10 minutes later, Daddy has left the room and little Johnny is asked if he wants to buy 1000 magic berries for $10... and doesn't need a password.
Then, you've got games which mix in-app purchases with real money and an in-app imaginary currency just for good measure...
Many puffins died to bring us this information...
Could someone explain this to me with a car analogy?
Someone invents the Star Trek Matter Replicator.
So, rather than take your new car out and get it dirty, you run it through the replicator to make a working copy for day-to-day driving and keep the original in the garage. While your at it, you make another copy for your Significant Other so that they can (according to their inclination) fill up the footwells with high-heeled shoes and/or dismantle it and leave bits strewn around the house without bothering you, and one for each of your 3 kids, and one for your mate Bob (in return for the speedboat that they let you copy last month).
Ford then sues the replicator manufacturer, basing their damages on the theory that obviously if you hadn't had the replicator you'd have bought seven cars off them instead of one.
Meanwhile, Paramount reveals that it applied for patents for everything in Star Trek in 1969 and, by continually updating the applications to involve more sex and lens flare, they're still valid, so they're suing as well.
This is why we can't haz post-scarcity utopia.
Why wasn't this modded funny? That list clearly was ironic, right?
"Solved" is a bit wildly optimistic.
"Improved beyond recognition where the laws exist and are enforced" I could go with.
Really guys, you update it but you do nothing about the processor or amount of RAM?!
Seriously, what do you expect for $35? They've done well to add the extra USB without raising the price (and, hopefully, removed the need to buy a powered USB hub which was the real dealbreaker with the old Pi).
The stated aim of the Pi was to always encourage people to muck around with programming and electronics without the risk of bricking an expensive PC. Its quite deliberately built down to a price, so letting the magic smoke out is never a big deal.
Devices like the Hummingboard and the BeagleBone Black (which probably wouldn't have existed without the success of the Pi) look great, but they already cost ~30% more.
Anyone got any ideas where I'm doing it wrong?
You need to 30 gems to get the Magic Scroll of Tort and unlock section 5. Best way is to purchase the "LawyerUp Gold" pack for $14.99.
Thank you for playing Crazy Courtroom Saga 3.
What is next, blame Ford because your kid was able to steal your keys off your dresser and wreck the car while you are sleeping?
...if Ford made the key fob in the shape of a cartoon character with a voice chip that kept saying "Hey kids! Pick me up and lets go for a drive" then, maybe.
Yes, parents should take responsibility for their kids - but that doesn't give businesses the right to exploit their slightest lapse.
If you actually had one, you'd be aware where the superchargers within 100 miles of you are
I've looked. There isn't one.
To be fair, I live in the UK and they're only just starting to roll out. Last time I looked, the nearest one was in the Netherlands, but now there's one in London, which is about 125 miles away. However, the problem is that it is in London. With London traffic, even if your home or destination is in another part of London, that's not a lot of use. According to the Tesla site they'll have about 10 stations around England by the end of the year - but if they are likewise in the middle of major cities rather than motorway service areas they will be of limited use.
Looking at the US map, there are plenty of states with no chargers.
I've also looked at what I could do with a Leaf or something: there is actually a pretty comprehensive network of 'fast' chargers at motorway service areas, hotels etc. so in theory I could make my most common ~200 mile journey with a mid-way recharge and lunch break... except there's one small problem: these stations typically have one "fast" charger (go and have lunch) and one "slow" charger (check in to the nearest hotel). If you arrived for your charge and somebody had already plugged in and buggered off for a 4-course meal, you'd better hope that you've got enough juice to get to the next one - which means you're going to end up stopping for a top up ad every single bloody charger you pass 'just in case'.
The BMW i3 with range extender looks interesting - especially as the UK/EU version has a bigger petrol tank than the US one (which has been gimped to qualify as an EV in California) - but it costs a fortune compared with other small cars.
For fuck's sake, read your choice of the article, the summary, or the title before posting. This is a $30,000 mid-range vehicle that would fulfil, entirely, the commuting needs of a vast segment of American commuters (who don't drive long distances or haul boats or other large things).
For fuck's sake, red and comprehend your choice of the article, the summary, or the title before flaming.
Nowhere in TFA does it say that the model E will cost $30,000. Telsa say that the E will be "realistically priced" (whatever that means) against the BMW 3 series and Audi A4. Whoever wrote the summary has helpfully looked up the starting price of an Audi A4 for you.
The Tesla E hasn't been launched yet - its unclear from TFA how far advanced the design is. There's no clue what the range is going to be, but if they're using heavy materials and have less space for the battery 'less than the Tesla S' would be a good bet.
Hint: BMW 3 and Audi A4 are already premium-priced cars. The E is still going to cost more and have less utility because of range limitations.
You should offer a service: if one of us is feeling guilty about burning gas, but we're not sure if using electricity from gas, oil or nuclear, we can offset our carbon footprint by buying you a Tesla that you can run on 100% guaranteed green* Icelandic geothermal power.
(*well, all those volcanos and geysers probably pump out obscene amounts of CO2 and radioactive shit, but that's not humanity's fault and they're still gonna do that if you don't harvest the energy).
How often do you drive across the US?
Why does it have to be across the US?
The problems start when you have to drive more than about 100 miles. Yeah, you can do 200-300 miles in a Tesla (depending on model) but then you have to start to think about things like do you need a heater/ air con/lights? Will you be able to recharge at your destination? If not, is there a supercharger en route? How much distance does that add? Hoe much time does that add?
So, forget trans-USA road trips. Just imagine a 100 mile each-way trip to a meeting somewhere (there and back in a day), with no guarantee of a power point at your destination, with no guarantee of 'goldilocks zone' weather.... and you're already worrying about range, whether there's a supercharger en. route, and having to leave an hour earlier.
That said, Tesla's fast battery swap looks like a much more practical alternative to a gas station. The 'charging station' idea doesn't scale if EVs get more popular: if you sometimes have to queue at a gas station with 15 pumps and a 5-minute turn around time, a couple of charging bays where people park and then head off for a meal just isn't going to cope.
From discussing this very solution, it seems people (At least american flesh-people) are very opposed to the notion of renting a car for the purpose of driving long-distances, or carrying large things around or just about anything.
... I'm not completely opposed to the notion of buying a "green" commuter car and renting for long trips (assuming that you live somewhere where you can get rental cars delivered at short notice in the event of a family emergency etc).
The notion I'm opposed to is buying a $70000 luxury saloon and still needing to rent another one for long-distance trips. If I bought a $50k+ car it would be precisely because I found myself making long journeys and wanted the comfort.
The Tesla S seems to have a niche for people with a home-based daily commute of, say, ~70 miles each way - long enough to justify wanting to do it in a really nice car but comfortably within the maximum range (so you could still pop out in the evening without waiting for the overnight recharge).
As for gas savings... If you're paying $70k for a new electric car when you can get a really nice gas one for $50k, a couple of k$ a year on gas is hardly a consideration. If you buy a brand new car rather than a 1-year-old one, the devaluation when you drive it off the forecourt could have kept you in gas for a couple of years...
Aperture won't run in Yosemite because Apple wants you to use the new app.
Not according to this which claims "an Apple spokesman told them" (distinct lack of "horse's mouth" links, unfortunately) that it would be updated to run on Yosemite.
I'm always amazed at what non-programmers are impressed by. Code up some major application, and... Why doesn't it have this feature? Why does it have that workflow? What kind of colorblind dyslexic idiot designed this UI? But whip up a simple script to automate some repetitive, routine task and you're a genius!
It suggests that one of these things solved a real problem that the users actually had, while the other solved problems that the developers thought the users ought to have.
A simple solution that does something useful, now, is worth 100 elegant applications that will totally revolutionise your work once they're finished... provided you completely re-arrange your practices to match the software.
So, I'm torn... freedom vs health... where do I stand?! I... think I have to go with freedom here. I *chose* to stop consuming that crap.
It doesn't have to be a dichotomy. The regulations shouldn't be on what is sold, but on how it is sold.
If someone walks up and ask for a super-gutbuster-megasize McMeal, fine - their decision. However, if someone walks up and orders a regular burger, don't try and upsell them to a larger portion. Don't offer to 'super size them' for a small amount (probably pure profit - I suspect the marginal cost of an extra squirt of syrup and another potato is a tiny proportion of the fixed cost of serving a meal), and don't have 'meal deals' that make a burger, drink and fries cheaper than just a burger and a drink*.
Also look at minimum portions (and this applies to 'better places' too, especially in the US): a Danish doesn't have to be the size of Denmark - if someone is really hungry they can buy two. A "starter" is not meant to be a full meal (calling a 10" pizza a 'flatbread' doesn't make it a starter - been there a few times!).
Even in the supermarket, why do chicken Kievs and suchlike always come in 2 packs? (and, conversely, when things do come in 'serves 1' portions, why are they 1/3 the size of the 'serves 2' version?) Why are bread rolls 60p each or £1.30 for 4?
ANS: because, one way or another, it lets businesses make more money or have a competitive edge. They're not going to change unless they are forced.
* Actually, I usually get diet cola anyway with a burger and (too much) < (too much + more), so its the unwanted fries that are the problem - yeah, I chuck them away sometimes, but its an effort: the easiest way not to eat food is not to buy it.
Reminds me of Elite of old past. While fun for a while, the similarities got boring and tedious pretty fast.
Thing is, although Elite used procedural generation, the game was about space combat, trading, piracy and smuggling with cutting edge (for the time - kids today won't understand) graphics. Things like the planet names and descriptions, and the fact there were a gazillion systems, were part of the atmosphere, not the Unique Selling Point.
Same with Minecraft - when you get fed up of exploring your effectively infinite world, there's building stuff, playing with redstone circuitry, fighting, potions, railways, breeding horses... The procedural generation is part of an ensemble. So the jury's out until we here what No Man's Sky's gameplay is like.
265 miles isn't far enough for you? You also get *free* charging at their stations.
265 miles then recharge at the nearest filling station would be fine. Hell, after 265 miles I'd be ready for an hour's break.
The reality, though, is 265 miles (assuming you're starting fully charged from your mains-equipped garage), minus x miles if you need air con, lights or heating, minus y miles detour to take in the nearest supercharger, minus z miles extra safety margin (because if you run out its a tow to the nearest supercharger) isn't quite there yet. From the map on Tesla's website, there are plenty of US states with no superchargers at all. According to the same map, there are 0 in the UK (which may be out-of-date).
Looking at the UK, there's an OK-looking network of non-super chargers (still nothing like the filling station network), but they're typically 1 regular (13A) bay + one fast charger bay. If you turn up and the fast charger is in use (with the occupants off somewhere having a meal or shopping) then you better have enough charge to get 50 miles to the next station...
Also, since the battery size is determined by the size of the car (unless you fill all the luggage space with battery), having to buy a full-size sedan just to get a > 100 mile range is a problem if you really want a compact. Personally, the Tesla is the sort of car I'd only consider if I was making regular long trips.
There's also a huge scalability problem with charging stations - a regular gas pump can fill one car every few minutes, an EV charging bay can only top-up one car every half hour but by that time the occupants will probably be staring their third Big Mac or in the mall trying on shoes. While EVs are a rarity you can get away with a couple of charging bays every 50 miles, which will probably pay for themselves by attracting wealthy Tesla owners to shops and restaurants. If they take off, you'd be talking about wiring up half the bays in the main parking lot.
I think its great that Tesla are working hard on some of these problems... I wish people wouldn't pretend that they were all solved.
(Actually, I've seen a video of Tesla's robotic quick battery swap procedure, which seems more viable for on-the-go recharges, and would be particularly sensible combined with a battery-leasing scheme).
*eye roll*
Why? Does that have more vitamin A than an egg roll?
It's free. 30 years down the road no one can claim a patent on it.
Yup, that's what's wrong with normal bananas - no payola for Big Agro.
Anti-GMO hysteria is anti-science, plain and simple. It is no different from insisting that CO2 doesn't drive global warming
Couple of important differences:
First, follow the money. Which side of each 'debate' is being bankrolled by big business?
Which side relies on "absence of evidence* is evidence of absence" and is expecting the other to "prove" its case by making firm "this is going to happen" predictions about a huge, complex, poorly understood natural system? (*and we get to choose what we mean by 'evidence')
Which side is proposing to "test" their position by forging ahead and irreversibly introducing material into the environment and seeing if any of the other sides doomsday predictions come true? You know, like continuing to pump CO2 into the atmosphere in increasing quantities, or going a head and introducing GMOs into the environment?
Which side is spouting scientifically incorrect bullshit like "CO2 is a harmless inert gas" or "We've been using GMOs for thousands of years?" (see thread above).
I'm not against GMO research provided it takes place in a sealed vat in a biologically isolated environment. Meanwhile, in Europe the problem is over-production fuelled by subsidies, and intensive farming (even without GMO) fucking up the environment. The third world is starving for a complex variety of reasons, including (but not limited to) poor infrastructure, wars, corrupt politics and some guy in Rome telling people not to use condoms. None of these problems are solved by maize resistant to one (expensive) brand of weedkiller or tomatoes with a 1-month shelf-life, especially when the end result is that your essential food crops are now (c), (r), (tm), patent-pending, copy-protected BigAgroCorp property. The amount of risk justified by these "benefits" is pretty much zero.