If I just run the battery to zero and am stranded, can I call up Tesla and ask them to unlock my extra capacity so I can drive home?
Maybe. If you have a 75kwh battery pack but only paid for 60kwh, then part of the 20% surplus is at the top and part at the bottom. So when your car is charged to 100%, it is really only charged to ~90%. When it reads 0%, you actually have about 10% left.
Is that 10% is enough to get you home?
By neither fully charging, nor fully discharging, you battery will last longer.
Public speaking is an important skill, but it has nothing to do with, say, math. So should a kid get a bad grade in algebra because he gets nervous in front of a classroom?
Martin Gardner turned down all invitations to speak, and said that he never felt comfortable speaking to a group of people.
Seung-Hui Cho suffered from selective mutism, which caused him to be bullied by other students, and humiliated by a teacher who threatened to give him a failing grade if he wouldn't talk. On April 16th, 2007, he murdered 32 of his classmates.
If it is connected to the Internet, the AI can earn money on Mechanical Turk, and then use that money to hire someone on Craigslist to come and remove the barriers.
There's people starving in the world, do you think if we increased prices enough they'd be able to get food...?
Yes. Most starving people in the world are farmers, who grow food. But because of price controls on food in many 3rd world countries, they don't earn much, have little incentive to plant more than they need to survive, and are unable to accumulate any savings. Then when weather or war disrupt this lives, they have nothing to fall back on.
Do artificially low food prices cause starvation? They certainly do.
Solution: heavy levels of automation, and protective trade restrictions.
Why not just do what makes economic sense? If hiring an Indian is cheaper than buying and maintaining a robot, then why use "trade restrictions" to force the latter over the former?
Is there is a moral argument for giving the robot the job rather than an Indian with hungry kids? And why should consumers pay higher prices to make that happen?
The real problem is that technology never replaced workers
The workers may not see that as a "problem".
it just changed their work
Technology doesn't automate "jobs", it automates "tasks". By making people more productive and more profitable to employ, automation often increases demand for workers. This is an example of Jevon's Paradox.
From the citation: Libertarians have differing opinions on the validity of intellectual property.
I grew up in a farming community, and the political views of farmers is basically: The damn government should keep their hands off my crop subsidies!!!
The term for that is price gouging when it happens around the time of a natural disaster.
It is only called "gouging" by people that don't understand markets. The likely storm track has been known for days. So why didn't the suppliers run extra overtime shifts to bring in more supplies? Answer: Because they knew they would not be allowed to recoup the extra costs, since NC has price control laws.
So anti-market laws were the reason for the shortage. "Price gouging" is the solution. Sure, prices would be higher, but not by as much as you think, since extra supplies would limit the rise. But there would have been far fewer shortages.
there are hardware stores out of plywood and generators and grocery stores out of bottled water and many food items and runs on gas stations, etc.
Obvious solution: Raise prices.
The higher prices will: 1. Ensure the products go to those that need them the most. 2. Penalize hoarding. 3. Eliminate queuing, so people can focus their time on other priorities. 4. Incentivize sellers to expedite new supplies so they can cash in. 5. Incentivize residents to prepare better next time.
Nor do you need to. Only the outer islands need to be evacuated.
People living inland, but too close to rivers or creeks need to move to higher ground, but they can still stay local.
Everyone else can shelter in place.
This is being compared to Harvey, which for flooding was a worst case scenario. It stalled over a major city on a plain. The death toll was 82. That is equivalent to a weekend of traffic deaths.
This is nonsense. Hurricanes are not driven by temperature differences between the tropics and temperate regions. They are driven by vertical differences in temperature and pressure.
Warm seas cause warm humid air near the surface. Warm air is lighter, and high humidity makes it lighter still. So it rises, creating a low pressure region, and drawing in more surface winds that pick up heat and humidity as they move to the center of the storm. When the air in the center rises, it spreads out and cools, condensing the humidity that falls as rain. The cooler dryer air then descends on the edge of the storm.
Warmer seas cause stronger storms. Cooler water weakens the storm as it travels north, the opposite of what you are claiming.
If the oceans were uniformly warm, would we still have hurricanes? Yes, and they would be stronger, bigger, and last longer.
you do have full control over what you are using your phone for and by extension what data is being sent out to nefarious companies.
No you don't. If you monitor your phone's packets, you may be surprised what data is being sent where.
Then try monitoring the packets from Alexa. Unless you say the keyword, you will see... nothing.
Bottom line: 1. There is no evidence that Alexa is "spying", or doing anything except listing for a particular keyword. 2. There is plenty of evidence that your cellphone is doing stuff behind your back and running 3rd party software.
If you trust your cellphone more than you trust Alexa, you are a deluded fool.
That phone is not really logging everything you do.
How do you know?
These chat speakers are.
There is no evidence of that. It would involve a conspiracy involving hundreds or perhaps thousands of people, knowingly breaking the law, and exposing one of the largest corporations in the world to massive class action lawsuits.
Why are stupid conspiracy theories believed for Alexa, but not for cellphones? The cellphone has a much larger attack surface. Just one bad app is all it takes, and the OS is far more complex than what a speaker has, with many more potential holes.
Slashdot Mirror
If I just run the battery to zero and am stranded, can I call up Tesla and ask them to unlock my extra capacity so I can drive home?
Maybe. If you have a 75kwh battery pack but only paid for 60kwh, then part of the 20% surplus is at the top and part at the bottom. So when your car is charged to 100%, it is really only charged to ~90%. When it reads 0%, you actually have about 10% left.
Is that 10% is enough to get you home?
By neither fully charging, nor fully discharging, you battery will last longer.
you should have full access to what you paid for
Except ... they didn't pay for it.
The buyers made an explicit choice to NOT pay for the additional range, in the full understanding that they wouldn't get that feature.
Communication of Math is part of doing Math.
... and the best communicator of math in my lifetime was Martin Gardner, who never gave a public speech.
Public speaking is an important skill, but it has nothing to do with, say, math. So should a kid get a bad grade in algebra because he gets nervous in front of a classroom?
Martin Gardner turned down all invitations to speak, and said that he never felt comfortable speaking to a group of people.
Seung-Hui Cho suffered from selective mutism, which caused him to be bullied by other students, and humiliated by a teacher who threatened to give him a failing grade if he wouldn't talk. On April 16th, 2007, he murdered 32 of his classmates.
Even the Chinese have started dumping e-waste since labor has become too expensive.
Seems like a good job for Africans or Haitians, at least until we get better robots.
Basic wages in Haiti are a tenth of China's.
When do we get reimbursed?
April 15th.
"It'd be a shame if anything happened to your island."
Something already happened. America vaporized one of their islands.
Capitalism fails when all the money is just in one pot too.
I'd love to see an example of that actually happening any time in human history would be acceptable.
July 14th, 1789, Paris, France.
There must be some governmental funding behind this "Vector Institute".
It is in Canada, so at least it is not my tax dollars being wasted.
Safe AI needs to understand concrete barriers.
If it is connected to the Internet, the AI can earn money on Mechanical Turk, and then use that money to hire someone on Craigslist to come and remove the barriers.
It depends -- the government may want to create jobs repairing, designing, and building the robots locally.
Historically, letting the government decide which jobs make sense is a really bad idea: Lemon Socialism.
There's people starving in the world, do you think if we increased prices enough they'd be able to get food ...?
Yes. Most starving people in the world are farmers, who grow food. But because of price controls on food in many 3rd world countries, they don't earn much, have little incentive to plant more than they need to survive, and are unable to accumulate any savings. Then when weather or war disrupt this lives, they have nothing to fall back on.
Do artificially low food prices cause starvation? They certainly do.
Usually socialism fails when you run out of OPM (other people's money).
This is more efficient, since they are skipping that step.
--
GENERATION 27: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
Like bolting seats into F150s and bumpers on Buicks?
Robots and foreigners already make plenty of cars.
Or the carpenter framing a new house?
You can order the roofing frames prebuilt. The door and window frames come ready to install.
Soon you will be able to upload the blueprints and have all the walls delivered a week later. Just stand them up, and join them at the corners.
Solution: heavy levels of automation, and protective trade restrictions.
Why not just do what makes economic sense? If hiring an Indian is cheaper than buying and maintaining a robot, then why use "trade restrictions" to force the latter over the former?
Is there is a moral argument for giving the robot the job rather than an Indian with hungry kids? And why should consumers pay higher prices to make that happen?
The real problem is that technology never replaced workers
The workers may not see that as a "problem".
it just changed their work
Technology doesn't automate "jobs", it automates "tasks". By making people more productive and more profitable to employ, automation often increases demand for workers. This is an example of Jevon's Paradox.
Dude. This place is a cesspool of libertarians (both right and left wing). You know what we think about your imaginary property
There is no single "libertarian" view of intellectual property.
Libertarian perspectives on intellectual property.
From the citation: Libertarians have differing opinions on the validity of intellectual property.
I grew up in a farming community, and the political views of farmers is basically: The damn government should keep their hands off my crop subsidies!!!
The term for that is price gouging when it happens around the time of a natural disaster.
It is only called "gouging" by people that don't understand markets. The likely storm track has been known for days. So why didn't the suppliers run extra overtime shifts to bring in more supplies? Answer: Because they knew they would not be allowed to recoup the extra costs, since NC has price control laws.
So anti-market laws were the reason for the shortage. "Price gouging" is the solution. Sure, prices would be higher, but not by as much as you think, since extra supplies would limit the rise. But there would have been far fewer shortages.
there are hardware stores out of plywood and generators and grocery stores out of bottled water and many food items and runs on gas stations, etc.
Obvious solution: Raise prices.
The higher prices will:
1. Ensure the products go to those that need them the most.
2. Penalize hoarding.
3. Eliminate queuing, so people can focus their time on other priorities.
4. Incentivize sellers to expedite new supplies so they can cash in.
5. Incentivize residents to prepare better next time.
You can't evacuate 30 million people
Nor do you need to. Only the outer islands need to be evacuated.
People living inland, but too close to rivers or creeks need to move to higher ground, but they can still stay local.
Everyone else can shelter in place.
This is being compared to Harvey, which for flooding was a worst case scenario. It stalled over a major city on a plain. The death toll was 82. That is equivalent to a weekend of traffic deaths.
What drives storms? Temperature differences.
This is nonsense. Hurricanes are not driven by temperature differences between the tropics and temperate regions. They are driven by vertical differences in temperature and pressure.
Warm seas cause warm humid air near the surface. Warm air is lighter, and high humidity makes it lighter still. So it rises, creating a low pressure region, and drawing in more surface winds that pick up heat and humidity as they move to the center of the storm. When the air in the center rises, it spreads out and cools, condensing the humidity that falls as rain. The cooler dryer air then descends on the edge of the storm.
Warmer seas cause stronger storms. Cooler water weakens the storm as it travels north, the opposite of what you are claiming.
If the oceans were uniformly warm, would we still have hurricanes? Yes, and they would be stronger, bigger, and last longer.
So basically this is a watch that forces you to recharge every day (until the battery degrades)
That is pretty good. My wife has an Apple Watch and needs to recharge every few hours.
I wouldn't be so bad if she would stop installing silly wallpaper apps, and video albums.
It was even worse before I helped her uninstall the bitcoin miner. I have no idea how that got into the app store.
you do have full control over what you are using your phone for and by extension what data is being sent out to nefarious companies.
No you don't. If you monitor your phone's packets, you may be surprised what data is being sent where.
Then try monitoring the packets from Alexa. Unless you say the keyword, you will see ... nothing.
Bottom line:
1. There is no evidence that Alexa is "spying", or doing anything except listing for a particular keyword.
2. There is plenty of evidence that your cellphone is doing stuff behind your back and running 3rd party software.
If you trust your cellphone more than you trust Alexa, you are a deluded fool.
40MB/hour translates to 28GB/month.
Only if you talk continuously.
That phone is not really logging everything you do.
How do you know?
These chat speakers are.
There is no evidence of that. It would involve a conspiracy involving hundreds or perhaps thousands of people, knowingly breaking the law, and exposing one of the largest corporations in the world to massive class action lawsuits.
Why are stupid conspiracy theories believed for Alexa, but not for cellphones? The cellphone has a much larger attack surface. Just one bad app is all it takes, and the OS is far more complex than what a speaker has, with many more potential holes.