I'm guessing, but I think the easiest way to meet a target once would be to divert some production in previous weeks as "requiring rework". Come the week you want to meet target, you send some folks out to the parking lot where the "rework" vehicles are stashed to install light bulbs, trim strips, or whatever else they are missing.
Not saying Tesla did that. Just that it or something similar could be done.
It seems sort of like a software capability demo. You can demo just about anything if you have enough time to set up the demo. The worse the product, the more time you need to spend setting up the demo.
The semi looks to be a perfectly viable product, but one has to wonder how big the market is. I would guess it will need a (expensive) custom charger if you plan to turn it around in less than 4-5 hours. That's likely to make it mostly depot to depot?
"It looks like many European countries (at least) will have effectively banned ICE vehicles within 10 years."
I doubt that'll actually happen when they actually get around to trying to formulate legislation. But I do think that the combination of high fuel prices, still emission standards, and driver convenience will cause a substantial switch from pure ICE to hybrid and PHEV vehicles with higher gas "mileage".
'Hm... I am finally going to hastily;-) order a Model 3 now."
Brilliant decision. You should jump at this opportunity to spend $40,000 or (most likely) more for a vehicle that is only moderately more inconvenient to own than a 1998 Toyota Camry.
For an extra $5000, you can get the optional autopilot that can drive you into bridges, police cars and fire engines if you have trouble managing that on your own. To my knowledge, there's no attermarket kit for the Camry that'll do that available at any price.
Certainly. And if you are interested in taking five months to get your cargo and passengers from San Diego to Boston (The Alert in 1835 as described by Richard Henry Dana in "Two Years Before the Mast"), Wind is a suitable and appropriate technology.
Let's see. Tesla is making 5000 Model 3s a week (see post above) and 2018 has 100 weeks, 5000*100 =500000, right? Sounds like the Elon is right on target.
Fortunately, they will only be a threat 30% of the time (40% if they are offshore). If you're smarter than, for example, Google, you can probably develop a strategy to disable them while they are sleeping.
"Now that the hype and vaporware are dead, from now on Tesla's Autopilot will be referred to as a Driver-Assistance system, or driver-assist for short."
At long last, a tool that will help those who are unable to run into fire-trucks on their own to achieve their life-long goal.
Nowadays, you contribute $50000 to your representative's campaign fund, and he or she conjures up a law REQUIRING individuals in medical facilities to wear antibacterial ties.
Got any documentation for either of those claims? From what I can see, President Dingbat has roughly the same management skills as Hillary Rodham Clinton. Pretty much none whatsoever.
Six major bankruptcies in his projects plus the Trump Shuttle which defaulted on its debts in 1990 but was dismembered by his bankers and sold without declaring bankruptcy.
A product of NASA's "faster, better, cheaper" phase. With this announcement, it is now $9.16B over initial budget ($500M) and 14 years late. On top of which, unanticipated (in 1996) improvement in the the capabilities of (cheaper) large Earth based telescopes purportedly will largely obviate the need for the visible spectrum capability.
Is it worth finishing and launching this thing, for the IR capabilities? I suppose so. But I won't be heartbroken if "they" finally get fed up and cancel the project. Maybe they can mount whatever has actually been built on a pedestal as a monument to hubris. Or use it for an artificial fishing reef.
Y'know what -- Compuserve and Fidonet via a 1200 baud modem in 1994 was in many ways a better user experience than the modern internet. There are some useful things on the Internet -- Wikipedia, Stack Overflow, etc. And it's sort of still possible to get news content despite the best efforts of advertisers to make that as unpleasant an experience as possible. But overall, I think the Internet perhaps even more than US commercial TV has become part of FCC commissioner Newton Minnow's Vast Wasteland.
Quit shilly shallying and let us know what you really think.
However, I completely agree with you. If we're going to let anybody on the planet download code to our computers then execute it, what's the point in worrying about Spectre and Meltdown? or passwords, or any other security measures for that matter?
It's been clear to me for decades -- ever since HTML email -- that the internet decision makers are more or less completely bonkers.
"Unfortunately, the whole business of diabetes, it's diagnosis and it's management is a complete shambles. That wouldn't be so bad if it was an uncommon disease."
Diagnosis? I'll give them a B+. A1C seems useful and is repeatable if you don't demand more than +- 0.5% accuracy. I'm less wild about blood glucose measurement. The measurement seems repeatable. But my experience is that different meters give results that are more different than they reasonably ought to be. And even with just one meter, my results are all over the place -- soaring occasionally for no obvious reason and sometimes coming in quite low despite no obvious dietary or activity related reason. Maybe OK for preliminary screening. Not something I think should be used for diagnosis. I check it once a day and run a profile a few times a month just to make sure that it's -- on average -- under control.
Management? Maybe a C or C- My experience was that I was totally unable to adequately control blood glucose with mealtime insulin even with tight control of dietary carbohydrates. I eventually, on my own, quit using mealtime insulin (before I killed myself) and settled for Metformin plus a daily shot long acting insulin My blood glucose settled to moderately erratic, but not frightening and I later found that I could be relatively relaxed about carbohydrate control. For me, it just doesn't seem to make much difference. Throughout the process the medical folks seemed sincere, knowledgable, and helpful. But I really don't think they know as much about diabetes as they think they do.
Overall, I think the doctors do sort of OK. Much better with diabetes than things like lower back pain and hypertension where I think the state of the art might best be described as mostly-clueless. I would say that overall, things medical have improved a lot since my youth in the 1940s when in lots of cases you might well have been better off without medical assistance. But they still have quite a ways to go..
"The problem is, if you go on to a different insulin, you then have to spend months testing several times a day and finding your right insulin regime. I just haven't got the energy for that"
Yes -- when they put me on insulin, I was pretty much completely unable to control my blood sugar. Good luck with yours.
It does, apparently, seem to be, as you describe it. It's unclear to me why the Type 1/2 diagnosis isn't based on blood insulin levels. Little or no insulin = Type 1. Lots of insulin but elevated blood glucose (A1C) = type 2.
But it's not. And if it were, diagnosis would still be difficult once supplemental insulin was used.
Quien Sabe? The study was done on a VERY small number of type 1 diabetics. Frankly, while I think it's worth following up, I'm quite skeptical that the study really shows anything meaningful.
1. The sample size is very small
2. There are surely a large number of probably poorly controlled variables (diet, exercise, other medications, lifestyle changes, etc,etc,etc) Is every aspect of YOUR life that might affect blood glucose levels unchanged over the past five years?
3. "They" have only the haziest idea of underlying mechanisms.
It'll be nice if this works out, but I wouldn't get my hopes up.
Solar City is clearly in the subsidy milking business, not the energy generation business. They probably couldn't care less how much energy (if any) their installations produce so long as the government checks continue to show up.
"Losing money left, right and centre doesn't mean you're not profitable."
Perhaps not, but there is often a strong correlation between losses and a lack of profitability. Plus which, it's a bit hard to classify closing facilities and firing workers as capital expenditure.
Different employee than yesterday I think. This seems to have to do with stealing trade secrets from the battery factory. That would seem to have some amount of plausibility. I seriously doubt that other automakers much give a damn about Tesla's vehicle technology. They can probably build an overpriced EV that runs into firetrucks without stealing secrets, and if they do need to know anything, they'll buy a Tesla and take it apart. But there are other Lion battery makers who might well like to know what Tesla is up to
Slashdot Mirror
I'm guessing, but I think the easiest way to meet a target once would be to divert some production in previous weeks as "requiring rework". Come the week you want to meet target, you send some folks out to the parking lot where the "rework" vehicles are stashed to install light bulbs, trim strips, or whatever else they are missing.
Not saying Tesla did that. Just that it or something similar could be done.
It seems sort of like a software capability demo. You can demo just about anything if you have enough time to set up the demo. The worse the product, the more time you need to spend setting up the demo.
The semi looks to be a perfectly viable product, but one has to wonder how big the market is. I would guess it will need a (expensive) custom charger if you plan to turn it around in less than 4-5 hours. That's likely to make it mostly depot to depot?
"It looks like many European countries (at least) will have effectively banned ICE vehicles within 10 years."
I doubt that'll actually happen when they actually get around to trying to formulate legislation. But I do think that the combination of high fuel prices, still emission standards, and driver convenience will cause a substantial switch from pure ICE to hybrid and PHEV vehicles with higher gas "mileage".
'Hm... I am finally going to hastily ;-) order a Model 3 now."
Brilliant decision. You should jump at this opportunity to spend $40,000 or (most likely) more for a vehicle that is only moderately more inconvenient to own than a 1998 Toyota Camry.
For an extra $5000, you can get the optional autopilot that can drive you into bridges, police cars and fire engines if you have trouble managing that on your own. To my knowledge, there's no attermarket kit for the Camry that'll do that available at any price.
Certainly. And if you are interested in taking five months to get your cargo and passengers from San Diego to Boston (The Alert in 1835 as described by Richard Henry Dana in "Two Years Before the Mast"), Wind is a suitable and appropriate technology.
"these days it makes more sense to build wind, solar and wave farms as those do less damage to the land."
Run everything from intermittent power sources. Great plan if you aren't compulsive about having the lights come on when you throw the switch.
Let's see. Tesla is making 5000 Model 3s a week (see post above) and 2018 has 100 weeks, 5000*100 =500000, right? Sounds like the Elon is right on target.
Let me get this straight. You're asserting that Donald J Trump and XKCD are sponsoring al-Qaeda?
Fortunately, they will only be a threat 30% of the time (40% if they are offshore). If you're smarter than, for example, Google, you can probably develop a strategy to disable them while they are sleeping.
"Now that the hype and vaporware are dead, from now on Tesla's Autopilot will be referred to as a Driver-Assistance system, or driver-assist for short."
At long last, a tool that will help those who are unable to run into fire-trucks on their own to achieve their life-long goal.
See the stars? San Francisco? There seems to be some sort of fundamental conceptual misunderstanding here.
"advertise antibacterial tie line"
How 19th century.
Nowadays, you contribute $50000 to your representative's campaign fund, and he or she conjures up a law REQUIRING individuals in medical facilities to wear antibacterial ties.
Got any documentation for either of those claims? From what I can see, President Dingbat has roughly the same management skills as Hillary Rodham Clinton. Pretty much none whatsoever.
Six major bankruptcies in his projects plus the Trump Shuttle which defaulted on its debts in 1990 but was dismembered by his bankers and sold without declaring bankruptcy.
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
A product of NASA's "faster, better, cheaper" phase. With this announcement, it is now $9.16B over initial budget ($500M) and 14 years late. On top of which, unanticipated (in 1996) improvement in the the capabilities of (cheaper) large Earth based telescopes purportedly will largely obviate the need for the visible spectrum capability.
Is it worth finishing and launching this thing, for the IR capabilities? I suppose so. But I won't be heartbroken if "they" finally get fed up and cancel the project. Maybe they can mount whatever has actually been built on a pedestal as a monument to hubris. Or use it for an artificial fishing reef.
"According to the researchers, all the mobile apps ICO organizers have launched in 2017 contained security flaws."
My, that's awkward. Maybe they'll do better in 2018. ... or 2019 ... or 2020.
I'm confident that if they prsevere, they can create a cryptocurrency that is merely pointless instead of being pointless and fatally flawed.
Y'know what -- Compuserve and Fidonet via a 1200 baud modem in 1994 was in many ways a better user experience than the modern internet. There are some useful things on the Internet -- Wikipedia, Stack Overflow, etc. And it's sort of still possible to get news content despite the best efforts of advertisers to make that as unpleasant an experience as possible. But overall, I think the Internet perhaps even more than US commercial TV has become part of FCC commissioner Newton Minnow's Vast Wasteland.
"And how about in the Web *user* community where the soon-to-be-compromised browsers will be running?"
Users? Who cares about users? (As long as they don't use ad-blockers)
Quit shilly shallying and let us know what you really think.
However, I completely agree with you. If we're going to let anybody on the planet download code to our computers then execute it, what's the point in worrying about Spectre and Meltdown? or passwords, or any other security measures for that matter?
It's been clear to me for decades -- ever since HTML email -- that the internet decision makers are more or less completely bonkers.
I do not expect the situation to end well.
"Unfortunately, the whole business of diabetes, it's diagnosis and it's management is a complete shambles. That wouldn't be so bad if it was an uncommon disease."
Diagnosis? I'll give them a B+. A1C seems useful and is repeatable if you don't demand more than +- 0.5% accuracy. I'm less wild about blood glucose measurement. The measurement seems repeatable. But my experience is that different meters give results that are more different than they reasonably ought to be. And even with just one meter, my results are all over the place -- soaring occasionally for no obvious reason and sometimes coming in quite low despite no obvious dietary or activity related reason. Maybe OK for preliminary screening. Not something I think should be used for diagnosis. I check it once a day and run a profile a few times a month just to make sure that it's -- on average -- under control.
Management? Maybe a C or C- My experience was that I was totally unable to adequately control blood glucose with mealtime insulin even with tight control of dietary carbohydrates. I eventually, on my own, quit using mealtime insulin (before I killed myself) and settled for Metformin plus a daily shot long acting insulin My blood glucose settled to moderately erratic, but not frightening and I later found that I could be relatively relaxed about carbohydrate control. For me, it just doesn't seem to make much difference. Throughout the process the medical folks seemed sincere, knowledgable, and helpful. But I really don't think they know as much about diabetes as they think they do.
Overall, I think the doctors do sort of OK. Much better with diabetes than things like lower back pain and hypertension where I think the state of the art might best be described as mostly-clueless. I would say that overall, things medical have improved a lot since my youth in the 1940s when in lots of cases you might well have been better off without medical assistance. But they still have quite a ways to go..
"The problem is, if you go on to a different insulin, you then have to spend months testing several times a day and finding your right insulin regime. I just haven't got the energy for that"
Yes -- when they put me on insulin, I was pretty much completely unable to control my blood sugar. Good luck with yours.
It does, apparently, seem to be, as you describe it. It's unclear to me why the Type 1/2 diagnosis isn't based on blood insulin levels. Little or no insulin = Type 1. Lots of insulin but elevated blood glucose (A1C) = type 2.
But it's not. And if it were, diagnosis would still be difficult once supplemental insulin was used.
"Would this work for type 2?"
Quien Sabe? The study was done on a VERY small number of type 1 diabetics. Frankly, while I think it's worth following up, I'm quite skeptical that the study really shows anything meaningful.
1. The sample size is very small
2. There are surely a large number of probably poorly controlled variables (diet, exercise, other medications, lifestyle changes, etc,etc,etc) Is every aspect of YOUR life that might affect blood glucose levels unchanged over the past five years?
3. "They" have only the haziest idea of underlying mechanisms.
It'll be nice if this works out, but I wouldn't get my hopes up.
"BCG is pretty much useless for TB, but they still give it out to everyone in the philippines."
So Type 1 diabetes is pretty much unknown in the Philippines?
Solar City is clearly in the subsidy milking business, not the energy generation business. They probably couldn't care less how much energy (if any) their installations produce so long as the government checks continue to show up.
"Losing money left, right and centre doesn't mean you're not profitable."
Perhaps not, but there is often a strong correlation between losses and a lack of profitability. Plus which, it's a bit hard to classify closing facilities and firing workers as capital expenditure.
Different employee than yesterday I think. This seems to have to do with stealing trade secrets from the battery factory. That would seem to have some amount of plausibility. I seriously doubt that other automakers much give a damn about Tesla's vehicle technology. They can probably build an overpriced EV that runs into firetrucks without stealing secrets, and if they do need to know anything, they'll buy a Tesla and take it apart. But there are other Lion battery makers who might well like to know what Tesla is up to