Given Tesla's previous unsuccessful attempt to sue Top Gear in the UK, I'm amazed that in 2013 we seem to be witnessing a slanging match "I was doing X speed / No you were doing Y". Surely anyone reviewing a electric car (actually, any car) would have a GPS not connected to the car with them and be able to provide full logs on request?
Also, wouldn't anyone driving a Tesla for the first time and seeing the range display reading an unexpectedly low value take a a picture of it with their phone?
Probably because the ICO waited until the Silly Season before releasing the press release so that it got picked up by the news media. I doubt that any actual "investigative reporting" was involved.
In a complicated world, it's nice that we can trust part of the media to divide all the inanimate objects in the world into those that cause or cure cancer:
...and TFA states that Walmart are trialling in San Jose which (a) is very urban, (b) is smaller than Seattle, and (c) had a fairly crap choice of supermarkets the last time that I was there.
Damn right - and in exceptionally poor taste as well.
How can someone who's first thought on hearing of the disaster in Japan is to release a tsunami-related press release for a TV show live with themselves?
Unfortunately "covered themselves legally" implies "not a bunch of crooks", whether they're doing something that you like or not.
There are already consumer protection laws in the UK that protect people from misselling. You already have an extended period in which to cancel contracts going forward. These days you have extra protection if you buy online ("distance selling"). Even advertising standards (though enforced by the industry) are surprisingly strictly enforced.
However, if you're signing a contract (which according to an earlier poster gives either side 30 days right to cancel) and you don't read that contract, and you complain AFTER 9 YEARS that a clause in that contract that you didn't notice, you're a muppet.
Do you really think that they should be obliged to provide a service essentially forever? Would you think it reasonable that someone who bought a telegraph machine in the 1800s would still be able to use it now, despite there being more sensible ways of doing the same thing? Off-the shelf PVRs with Freeview / Freesat EPGs are cheap as chips. Sure, that service won't last forever (like analogue TV it'll be replaced by something else at some point in the future) but it's something that does all your existing box does and more, for no monthly fee. What's not to like?
And since (according to the link from the summary) they haven't been charging at all since last year, there's not much to complain about then, is there?
You may have seen the words "lifetime subscription" in there, but what did the rest of the contract actually say? That's the important bit, not just the bit you remember from the advertising blurb. It's a bit like "unlimited broadband" in that respect. If you really think that you've got a legal case, engage messrs Sue, Grabbit, and Runne.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, not quite....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...
Then why do they call it "unlimited?"
Because they're selling to you.
It's not up to the consumer to know if a company's business plan is sustainable or not.
It is, if you want that company and your data to be still there in X months time.
Claiming unlimited usage and then having a cap is just false advertising.
If that's illegal where you live, call them on it. If not, move somewhere with decent consumer protection legislation.
IIRC, the research which found plastic bags will last for "hundreds of years" was in fact looking at plastic bottles.
That's my recollection too, in my case gained from here (about 10 minutes in):
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03b2zbk
(That plays in the UK, but I've no idea if it'll work in whatever corner of the planet you're in)
Specifically it's referring to Polyethylene Terepthalate (are you old enough to remember Terylene? If so, that's the stuff. If not, good for you).
Exactly this.
Given Tesla's previous unsuccessful attempt to sue Top Gear in the UK, I'm amazed that in 2013 we seem to be witnessing a slanging match "I was doing X speed / No you were doing Y". Surely anyone reviewing a electric car (actually, any car) would have a GPS not connected to the car with them and be able to provide full logs on request?
Also, wouldn't anyone driving a Tesla for the first time and seeing the range display reading an unexpectedly low value take a a picture of it with their phone?
There's a bit more "he said / she said" in this followup article:
http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/12/the-charges-are-flying-over-a-test-of-teslas-charging-network/?ref=johnmbroder
including links to Elon Musk's "detour" claims, and the NYT journo's rebuttal.
It's already done in Europe on beer producers:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Beer_Duty
It works very well in the UK.
A quick look here:
http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/newestosm.php
Suggests roughly twice as many new mappers (at least in the UK) during the last 24 hours than would be normal.
The Chileans would certainly remember, if they didn't write their dates the "wrong way around".
I'm planning on watching this BBC Documentary this weekend; it looks like the first segment discusses game theory.
Perhaps not quite up there with some of Adam Curtis' other stuff (e.g. Pandora's Box), but definitely well worth watching.
So the country's doing just fine, right?
When TomTom puts their name on the front of the box, it's TomTom's problem (and, in the users' minds, their fault).
"Europe's Largest IT Company tries to get some decent PR after all the recent bad publicity"
OK, maybe some of the recent publicity for Rupert's media outlets hasn't exactly been 100% positive, but at least this'll sell some books.
Clearly where the designers of my old Peugeot got their ideas from.
Probably because the ICO waited until the Silly Season before releasing the press release so that it got picked up by the news media. I doubt that any actual "investigative reporting" was involved.
In a complicated world, it's nice that we can trust part of the media to divide all the inanimate objects in the world into those that cause or cure cancer:
http://thedailymailoncologicalontologyproject.wordpress.com/
...and TFA states that Walmart are trialling in San Jose which (a) is very urban, (b) is smaller than Seattle, and (c) had a fairly crap choice of supermarkets the last time that I was there.
A lot of Tories are against the EU, his rant is snide dig at supposed EU regulations
Actually he's a Liberal Democrat, so instead it's a shameless attempt to ingratiate himself with the Daily Mail.
Damn right - and in exceptionally poor taste as well.
How can someone who's first thought on hearing of the disaster in Japan is to release a tsunami-related press release for a TV show live with themselves?
According to Wikipedia, that's exactly 347 people mildly inconvenienced. Somehow I doubt that Larry Ellison is losing too much sleep.
Unfortunately "covered themselves legally" implies "not a bunch of crooks", whether they're doing something that you like or not.
There are already consumer protection laws in the UK that protect people from misselling. You already have an extended period in which to cancel contracts going forward. These days you have extra protection if you buy online ("distance selling"). Even advertising standards (though enforced by the industry) are surprisingly strictly enforced.
However, if you're signing a contract (which according to an earlier poster gives either side 30 days right to cancel) and you don't read that contract, and you complain AFTER 9 YEARS that a clause in that contract that you didn't notice, you're a muppet.
Do you really think that they should be obliged to provide a service essentially forever? Would you think it reasonable that someone who bought a telegraph machine in the 1800s would still be able to use it now, despite there being more sensible ways of doing the same thing? Off-the shelf PVRs with Freeview / Freesat EPGs are cheap as chips. Sure, that service won't last forever (like analogue TV it'll be replaced by something else at some point in the future) but it's something that does all your existing box does and more, for no monthly fee. What's not to like?
Feel free - it's your money you'd be spending.
And since (according to the link from the summary) they haven't been charging at all since last year, there's not much to complain about then, is there?
Marketing? Like the difference between a squirrel and a rat?
You may have seen the words "lifetime subscription" in there, but what did the rest of the contract actually say? That's the important bit, not just the bit you remember from the advertising blurb. It's a bit like "unlimited broadband" in that respect. If you really think that you've got a legal case, engage messrs Sue, Grabbit, and Runne.