No, I think his point that Tesla "owns" an irrelevant market in the US. It's less than 1% of the entire automotive market in the US. And Tesla still loses money owning that market. Mercedes, BMW, Jag, Audi - they at least make a profit being "number 2"...
False. Approximately 30 million - minimum - attributed to military action and crimes against humanity. Disease and famine were "only" 20 million or so... Military deaths were around 21 million.
First link uses the EXACT SAME SOURCE as your link; I guess you're full of denialist bunk as well? Typical anti-science stance you take - it's not the message, but the messenger that matters.
For pretty much 99.99% of man's history, musicians only made money by performing. It was the advent of recorded music and radios back around 1920 that changed it. No surprise we're swinging back to the way it historically was - money for performance, not ad-infinitum royalties. This is also true for pretty much ALL art - the painter sold the painting once, the sculptor sold the sculpture once. The musician or actor sold their performance once (the musician and actor, however, could repeat their performance later in time, unlike the painter who would have to create a new painting).
Perhaps because - as terrible as the Armenian genocide was, and the number of victims in the Darfur war - an order of magnitude (or more) died from genocide and war during WWII. Close to 80 million civilians died during WW2 - most of those at the hands of soldiers intent on genocide.
For dates before the year 1, unlike the proleptic Gregorian calendar used in the international standard ISO 8601, the traditional proleptic Gregorian calendar (like the Julian calendar) does not have a year 0 and instead uses the ordinal numbers 1, 2, both for years AD and BC. Thus the traditional time line is 2 BC, 1 BC, AD 1, and AD 2. ISO 8601 uses astronomical year numbering which includes a year 0 and negative numbers before it. Thus the ISO 8601 time line is 0001, 0000, 0001, and 0002.
Not that also includes ISO 8601 - a recognized standard. So there you go. No year zero, we start with year 1.
No, Tesla's Autopilot ran into a motorcycle. The police officer who was hit (yes - it hit a POLICE VEHICLE) got off the bike in time; this Norwegian rider wasn't so lucky. Need we go on with more Autopilot failures?
Accumulated cyclone energy has been trending down for 25 years. Global warming didn't burn Ventura County (where I live). Santa Anas, and a delayed rainy season (because of La Nina - and which we've already more than recovered from, it's been a wet and cold fall, winter, and spring) combined with some extremely difficult terrain that hadn't burned in a decade (lots of fuel) to create the fire.
But believing in them would be so silly that we have no words to describe the obverse like aunicornist and no one attempts to twists themselves in logical knots if you claim that they do not in fact exist.
A scientist would not say they believe in unicorns, any more than they would be required they believe in a higher power; rather they leave the possibility open since it has zero data either way. If you want the scientific position, you'd say "there's no evidence either way; I personally believe (yes/no), but I cannot definitively say one or the other". What experiment would you design to prove either unicorns or a higher power exists? How could you confirm or deny the existence either way?
Oh, you may want to watch this guy about how models and data should be evaluated when they don't agree. Data trumps - each time. IPCC models don't agree with data. The IPCC models are wrong. No religious bias needed.
His data is public. I guess though maybe he made Christian satellites? Facts are facts - and the satellite record does not agree at all with the IPCC models. So do you listen to data - or to models?
Slashdot Mirror
When will a new proprietary W1/Bluetooth network protocol for Apple devices be announced?
I will just point you to this excellent post detailing why you're wrong. The usual "capital investments!" doesn't hold - fixed costs currently push Tesla into a loss. NOT variable costs.
Apple solved this issue a LONG time ago, they're just waiting for the proper amount of courage to release it.
Aunt Jemima confirmed the first is real and a good friend of hers, but refused to comment on Mr. Giant.
He was hanging around Hugh Jardon last time I saw...
How much profit does Tesla make? None. How much volume do they have to ramp up to make a profit? When will that happen?
No, I think his point that Tesla "owns" an irrelevant market in the US. It's less than 1% of the entire automotive market in the US. And Tesla still loses money owning that market. Mercedes, BMW, Jag, Audi - they at least make a profit being "number 2"...
Only when said "compelling EV" sells for a loss. Like the Teslas...
They are shown annually on TV (IIRC, CCTV3) in China.
And for that - they must all die...
Rather, your crank gets it wrong; at the good Dr. Maue's site you can find the raw data, and it has a slight negative slope on the fit.
False. Approximately 30 million - minimum - attributed to military action and crimes against humanity. Disease and famine were "only" 20 million or so... Military deaths were around 21 million.
First link uses the EXACT SAME SOURCE as your link; I guess you're full of denialist bunk as well? Typical anti-science stance you take - it's not the message, but the messenger that matters.
For pretty much 99.99% of man's history, musicians only made money by performing. It was the advent of recorded music and radios back around 1920 that changed it. No surprise we're swinging back to the way it historically was - money for performance, not ad-infinitum royalties. This is also true for pretty much ALL art - the painter sold the painting once, the sculptor sold the sculpture once. The musician or actor sold their performance once (the musician and actor, however, could repeat their performance later in time, unlike the painter who would have to create a new painting).
What's worse, they found her house WAS poisoned as nitrogen composed nearly 80% of what she was breathing! Poor dear never had a chance...
Perhaps because - as terrible as the Armenian genocide was, and the number of victims in the Darfur war - an order of magnitude (or more) died from genocide and war during WWII. Close to 80 million civilians died during WW2 - most of those at the hands of soldiers intent on genocide.
For dates before the year 1, unlike the proleptic Gregorian calendar used in the international standard ISO 8601, the traditional proleptic Gregorian calendar (like the Julian calendar) does not have a year 0 and instead uses the ordinal numbers 1, 2, both for years AD and BC. Thus the traditional time line is 2 BC, 1 BC, AD 1, and AD 2. ISO 8601 uses astronomical year numbering which includes a year 0 and negative numbers before it. Thus the ISO 8601 time line is 0001, 0000, 0001, and 0002.
Not that also includes ISO 8601 - a recognized standard. So there you go. No year zero, we start with year 1.
Is the driver of the car called an autopilot, and promised as a technology to revolutionize driving?
No, Tesla's Autopilot ran into a motorcycle. The police officer who was hit (yes - it hit a POLICE VEHICLE) got off the bike in time; this Norwegian rider wasn't so lucky. Need we go on with more Autopilot failures?
Accumulated cyclone energy has been trending down for 25 years. Global warming didn't burn Ventura County (where I live). Santa Anas, and a delayed rainy season (because of La Nina - and which we've already more than recovered from, it's been a wet and cold fall, winter, and spring) combined with some extremely difficult terrain that hadn't burned in a decade (lots of fuel) to create the fire.
Sadly, with the way Teslas on autopilot will ram motorcycles we will soon see if a Duc will fit in the gaps...
It's OK, it's Tesla. We're expected to accept numbers pulled out of the arse because Musk (praise be unto his name).
But believing in them would be so silly that we have no words to describe the obverse like aunicornist and no one attempts to twists themselves in logical knots if you claim that they do not in fact exist.
A scientist would not say they believe in unicorns, any more than they would be required they believe in a higher power; rather they leave the possibility open since it has zero data either way. If you want the scientific position, you'd say "there's no evidence either way; I personally believe (yes/no), but I cannot definitively say one or the other". What experiment would you design to prove either unicorns or a higher power exists? How could you confirm or deny the existence either way?
Oh, you may want to watch this guy about how models and data should be evaluated when they don't agree. Data trumps - each time. IPCC models don't agree with data. The IPCC models are wrong. No religious bias needed.
His data is public. I guess though maybe he made Christian satellites? Facts are facts - and the satellite record does not agree at all with the IPCC models. So do you listen to data - or to models?