Pretty much this. I'd like to point out, embarrassing though it might be, that I can code badly in a few languages. Worse, I plan on brushing up (and am doing so) my skills and learning a couple of new languages. I'll then give that code away (a handful of people will use it, ever) and hate me for it.
No, I can code poorly with any tools you give me. In fact, I probably will.
There's problems with everything... There are security issues in everything. There will be bugs so long as we have humans writing software. When we have machines writing software, there will still be bugs. Why? Well, because it will have been a human that wrote that machine's code to begin with. With bugs come security issues. Without best practices come security issues. Without good education come security issues.
Good, bug-free, and secure start in the chair and before a line of code is written. No, I don't know this because of my own individual performance. I know this because I hired good, professional, programmers to do things that I could not. They were not only good but they were instructional - if you wanted to put the effort into learning.
I am reminded of a grandpa story... I'll try to make it brief.
We had a secretary who was pretty bright but she wanted to change jobs and do something more interesting. We didn't need anyone in a new job that she was suited for. Well, she decided she was going to be a programmer. So, probably mostly because she was cute and single, she was "allowed" to spend time with the programmers. She started to learn, started to practice, and damned if she wasn't writing code in a little while.
Oh, it gets a little better... She eventually learned to code quite well, just from asking good question - this is about the bit about the programmers being instructional - if you wanted to put the effort in. She actually turned out to be pretty good. We sent her to a few classes, she changed jobs, and actually ended up in QA but our QA was a little different in that they usually tried to fix the bugs themselves. We didn't actually have anyone who had the job title of QA. We just had people who filled that role because that's what they did best and were happiest doing. They largely organized themselves.
At any rate, I'll avoid the novella but they really did teach you a lot if you wanted to learn. Yes, I wrote the code base. Yes, I maintained that code and added to that code for years. It was badly written C but it worked. It wasn't for public consumption or anything so it was okay. Still, things grew and I handed off the code and it was eventually all reworked in C++. I was not ever a good programmer but I learned a lot of good things - many forgotten, and (more importantly) I learned to ask good questions. Well, I think they're good. They must be? I get the answers that I need.
While I am not (nor should I be confused with) a Republican - I think you'll find your logical fallacy is that of the excluded middle. Small does not mean absolute least amount. Those would be the minarchists. They are not generally Republicans. We have some in my party, however. I'm inclined to agree in principle - I'm just not certain that their ideal is reasonable or would be as effective as they like. They're usually proponents of a strong, very strong, but minimal government. Some are actually in favor of a weak and minimal government, they're not far from anarchists and I tend to think of them in similar manners.
Oh, they're great ideals and would be fantastic in an ideal world and that's all good. It's just unrealistic, never going to happen - ever, and is silly to even propose it in a serious conversation about where the lines should be drawn.
It's not their own oil but I seem to recall a company called Neste Oil has a bunch of refineries there. It was on NPR not that long ago. They don't have their own oil but they refine a whole bunch of it.
Umm... That's according to NPR and I'm a bit too lazy to Google. I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure that they do process billions of dollars worth of oil. I believe they do a lot of Norway's oil? My memory is really not that good so feel free to Google.
How much of an impact this has on the economy, I do not know nor will I speculate as I am unqualified. I just happen to recollect the name Neste and thus I remember the story. Err... It was the afternoon show with that old lady, I've forgotten her name. I still manage to listen to MPBN because they're on the 'net. It works out well enough even if I'm in Florida for the winter.
Texas has its own oil, its own electrical infrastructure (really), a bunch of bases with military equipment, and is the size of many other nations. They're also REALLY particular about their young women, blond or not. No, "we" might let them have the Californian girls but probably not Texans. That might make them finally revolt and, contrary to popular opinion, that would probably be a bad thing.
Have you ever SEEN Texas? Have you ever seen an angry Texan? Do you not have history books and newspapers in your neighborhood? This is Texas, they don't even mind a "good killin,' now and then." They also seem hell bent on killing anyone who kills one of them. While that might seem significant, it means we'd have to round up all the blonds in Texas (just the natural blonds are going to be a handful), disarm THEM, disarm their brothers, fathers, and boyfriends, and then somehow make it out without killing ANY of them - because if we kill one, it's gonna escalate and we'll have to kill them all.
It's Texas. They don't actually issue you a firearm at birth. Nope. They issue you two, 'cause you got two hands. They probably give 'em a whole box of bullets, funded by the State, for every birthday.
Put it this way, Texas likes killing people so much that they've actually convinced people to make them (and sell to them) deadly chemicals. Why? I'm not really sure. They weren't going to but then, I presume, they sent Chuck Norris over to have a talk with 'em and he's a Texas Ranger.
You know that slogan, "Don't mess with Texas?" It often has a picture of an Angry Texan and a couple of revolvers? Yeah, that's actually from an anti-littering campaign. Dude, I don't generally go to Texas but I'm assuming they'll KILL YOU for littering. If you want to send the Texas blonds to the Middle East, you're gonna have to round 'em up yourself. I'm not only not helping you do it, I'm not even going to come save your ass when they "catch hold" of you.
No, son... When you get old enough, you realize there are certain things you shouldn't fuck with. One of those things is a hornet's nest. Another one is Texans. I'll remind you again, they LIKE killing. They LAUGH at you if you propose that they stop doing it. Hell, they get offended if you suggest that they stop killing. And you want to go take their blond women? I can only assume you're still a child. Good luck with that. Texas has oil. They're gonna be really, really mad if you try to take their blond women.
Hell, they might be mad if you take their Black (Colored) or Hispanic (Chino) women. No, they're gonna be mad. Why? One word for you, son. Texas.
Umm... I just *did* make that argument. Well, not argument, statements of facts. What's funny is everyone wants to blame the US when they could be blaming themselves. More importantly, rather than blame either one of those two groups, how about blaming the guilty parties - blame the folks who are committing the atrocities. Imagine that? Assigning blame where it belongs. Sadly, that's actually a foreign concept and ludicrous. We can't, you know, blame the people chopping off heads.
Oh, I understand why they're not blaming them. Blaming them would mean they'd have to do something about it and might get their heads chopped off. They're quite understandably afraid of that. It might also mean accepting some accountability for their forefathers and cleaning up their mistakes. It's much easier (and safer!) to just blame America.
Umm... You know, this problem stems from the colonization and resulting arbitrarily drawn lines by the League of Nations, right? The US had no part in any of that - including, declining multiple requests to participate in the League of Nations. The colonization, abuses, and then setting up lines where no previous lines had existed and giving people authority where they should have none is what caused this. The meddling by the US hasn't helped it but it sure as hell isn't the cause.
History is longer than just 15 years. It's fun to blame the US and all - and I'm certainly not saying the US has helped as much as they like to think they have. However, blaming this on the US is rather silly. The situation is there because of colonization and border creation - and the ensuing power structures that were doomed to failure. The fault lies with the people committing the atrocities, however.
Blaming the US is borderline mentally retarded and shows a complete lack of knowledge of history. The blame doesn't belong with the colonizers and border makers. They made the situation exist but the blame still lies with the folks committing the atrocities. But, I guess it's easier than fighting the people committing the atrocities so blame away. The US is surely used to it now.
Hmm... Welcome to the United States.:/ We've been gutting our educational system, middle class, and liberties for years. I'd say you'll get used to it but you probably won't. It will be typical and accepted by the generation that follows your generation.
Oh, I'd type a novella explaining how important it is to make changes and (maybe) even how to work on making those changes but I'm going to skip it. Nobody ever listens and the next generation will just call you a Luddite anyhow. Just wait until they start encroaching on your personal freedoms and you have your fellow citizens telling you that you don't need those rights and that having those rights is dangerous, a throwback, or enabling unlawful actors. Hell, they might even accuse you of aiding and abetting those unlawful actors - just for wanting your liberties, enumerated rights, and honesty.
No, you never really get used to it and typing out a novella won't help you any. There's likely a subset of your country that agrees with these cuts. They'll be vocal if you work against them or aren't seen as joining them. It gets worse. I assume, given history, that it's cyclical. The pendulum appears to swing both directions but it is often REALLY bad when the pendulum swings wildly. No, a novella won't help.
I seen to recall that not only did Microsoft get their tech and a bunch of patents but that, somehow, they were able to write down the loss as more than what they'd actually paid for the company. I also am sort of remembering that Nokia can re-enter the market sometime soon and that they had/have a really strange deal with Microsoft that has some oddities in licensing the tech, name, and that sort of thing. So, we may see them again but probably under a different name (for their phones) and probably not with Windows on them.
Oddly, I have a Windows phone and actually bought it on purpose - I wasn't drunk or high or anything. Well, I might have been a little high or something but I don't remember being so. I guess I can put 10 on it but I have yet to do so. I really don't use my phone for anything much other than texting, emailing, browsing, and making phone calls. It works quite well for what I use it for. It is not a Nokia.
It's got insurance and I own it to be driven. When it breaks, I'll fix it or get a new one. It's just money, they'll make more. Yes it's "bespoke" but that just means I've got some extra sport package features, unusual trim and tires, and some different colors. Oh, and a nice stereo with a fancy HUD that's a little different from the standard model.;-)
So, drive it like you stole it. 'Cause if my insurance company asks, that's what I'm gonna tell 'em you did. I kid... I kid... My license, thus any vehicle I own or drive, is covered by $1m USD. It's full coverage so you'd be covered, in full, even on the track. They're well aware that I race but I don't race anything expensive enough to actually make claims on it. I could and they'd just charge me more money. It's a private insurance company and already a bit pricey but not really that bad when you look at what it covers.
It's probably not the optimal choice for the Golden Road. The engine is blown in what *would* be my optimal choice, for what I own. I've been thinking about a WRX or a Mini. I've seen some WRX after-market jobs (you buy it and send it directly off to them) that I'm impressed with. I also seem to recall that there's a company that will tweak your Mini to get some 700 ponies. No, I have no idea how long the engine will last in one. I'm assuming that 20k would be lucky. There's a few very nicely done up WRX models, specifically configured to rally, but I'd then probably not want to push them as far and as hard as I can.
If you can't push it and enjoy it, why own it? So, by that token, I'd be sitting beside you and urging you to go faster. We should probably outfit it with a roll cage, better seats, and five point restraint harnesses (and wear helmets) if we're going to really push it. While I am certainly game, I really think that'd be better done on the Golden Road and with a better vehicle. Putting the 6 on Daytona would be a lot of fun, however. I'm pretty sure that either of them would make them shit a brick.
Oh, and we could look on innocently when they're reviewing the data... That would be also awesome. Yes, I don't think you should be forced to go it alone! As such, I'm afraid I'll have to go with you.
"No, sir, this says you hit 186 miles an hour." "Oh, that? Yeah, that has to be some mistake." "No, I don't think so sir. It says here that you maintained that speed for nearly 45 minutes and had lateral motion of greater than 1G for 37% of the time." "Oh, you mean THAT. Yeah, I was outrunning the cops that day. Does this insurance plan also cover bullet holes?"
Hmm... Assuming I shift well, I should be able to pull about a 12.5 quarter mile. That should almost certainly get their notice. So, we could have some fun there. I'm liking the idea of a WRX or Cooper, tweaked into a roaring machine that sounds like it has come from the bowels of hell, and the Golden Road. That should, bare minimum, get us some interesting letters and emails. Even more fun will be doing it as Uber drivers. I promise, you can drive first and I'll leave you a stellar review.
Hmm... You'd not praise a car for being a good car? I'm not sure that I understand why you'd think the creation was not deserving praise. Much like you praise good art, the art itself, yet still have praise for the artist, so too can you praise (or damn) a device for its inherent qualities. It's not like there is a value of praise where there's none left for the creator or user of a tool. I dare say, we humans praise a whole host of tools all the time. Everything from programming languages to operating systems to browsers are praised or damned here, on this site, on a daily basis.
I don't think that qualifies as asinine to praise a tool for having the virtues that make it a good tool. It's not like you can't also praise the tool's creator.
Hmm... So you've owned a computer for no longer than 15 years. That doesn't discount your views, by default, but it does mean you're still wet behind the ears and some folks will value your views in light of that. That said, I like NewEgg and shop there frequently. I've bought a lot of computers, to be made or pre-assembled, from them and have had great interactions with them.
I could, I guess, save a couple of dollars from shopping around but I'm happy going through NewEgg. I've had good service and support and will continue to shop with them just because I tend to stay where I am - if I'm happy. I'm happy there and that means I'll keep shopping there. It's not exclusive, nor is it not subject to change, but my tech shopping is done there the vast majority of time and I would need a good reason to change that behavior.
I understand that they treat their employees well and pay them well but I have a sample size that totals one for that. At the same time, I've not noticed any great commotion to do with their treatment of their employees. So, there's that.
I'm glad that they have a policy of standing up to patent trolls - I'm not really sure how much of an effect that really has. I mean, how often are they attacked by trolls? It just doesn't seem like they are producing a whole lot (I think they have one brand that they own - that I know of) so I'm not sure how much chance they'll get to act on that. It's nice that they do and is a good benefit to my already shopping there.
Hmm... I've used the site since the early days. I don't remember how I found it but I think (and I'm not positive) they kept showing up on a price comparison site that I used back then. No, I have no idea how long ago that was but they were a small outfit. I've only purchased hardware for myself and others on the site - not for business. When I still owned my company, I went directly through Sun or (often) through a company called CDW. They've been in business for a long time, I highly recommend them for business account usage. I've no affiliation (to the best of my knowledge) but my company was a very happy customer for a very long time.
That said, I used my first programmable computer in 1969 or so. I don't think I owned my own until the 1980s (A TRS-80 was the first one, as I recall, but it might have been a VIC-20 that I owned first - my memory is fuzzy.) I've put together loads of my own computers but I prefer them at least partially assembled now. That's where NewEgg comes in. They've got a decent selection, fine prices, and good service and support. In all these years, I can make not one complaint.
There... I figure I'll add a few years to your experience. They've only been around since 2001 and you can't be a very experienced user if you've only ever used computers that you've put together on their site. I have lots of experience and lots of history with a whole bunch of sites - and I still make use of NewEgg with an alarming frequency.
It should be noted, I'd have no problems using them for business purchases. However, I sold in 2007 and was still using CDW (more often than not) at the time. I'm not sure how well NewEgg would have handled a desktop refresh of a couple hundred PCs at the time. I'm not sure how well equipped they were to deal with forklift upgrades at the time. I'd not be surprised, at all, to find out that they're quite adequate at it today. I'm not sure that I'd have trusted them (longevity matters sometimes) at the time.
Pretty much this. Unlike others and probably for no good reason other than I am a creature of habit - it's not even so much about the trolls, but that's a nice value added benefit, I generally shop at NewEgg. I'm not horribly concerned about price and the prices are usually close-enough. Unless it's broken, I only buy what I wanted, so nothing gets returned and I don't have to deal with their restocking fee.
When I've had an issue, I've had no problem returning it. That's seldom. I'm also honest about it - if I broke it then I don't just return it. If I buy a cheap device, instead of the more expensive device, and it doesn't work as well as I was hoping then I don't return it - so long as it works at all.
So, I pretty much just go to NewEgg for tech gear. I also buy quite a bit of stuff from them. I'm always buying something new - I really need to unsubscribe from their mailings. I have the impulse control of a five year old and the bank account big enough to make it a problem. Fortunately, I'm not a hoarder and I'm not a huge fan of clutter. I'm always able to find some kind soul who's willing (often eager) to take my tech hand-me-downs. Given my obscene hardware refresh rates, impulse buys, and inability to remember what I was thinking when I bought half the stuff - I probably buy enough stuff to keep a good sized group of geeks amused, full time.
Ah well... This won't actually change my buying habits. I pretty much just go to NewEgg and buy there already. It's very rare for me to buy hardware or tech items on Amazon and, if I do, it's probably a book or another damned impulse buy. Fortunately, maybe, the missus is a budding geek and will help me make use of the hardware. She's also pretty good with money, or so it seems so far, so maybe that will help - at least maybe she'll feel compelled to help me make use of some of those things that I buy.
"Oh, look. Those hard drives are dirt cheap and a good brand. They've got good reviews, are just a year old now, and they're on sale? Yes, yes I can probably use ten of them. No, ship it today - it's important!" Sadly, I just had that conversation in my head a few days ago. I did (still sort of do) have a plan for those hard drives - except I have absolutely no need for them. A plan? Yes. A need? Not so much.
Ah well... If you've ever wondered who those stupid emailings targeted? I'm that guy. You can unsubscribe. I probably should have done so years ago. "Oh, nice, they've got USB thumb drives on sale! I need a half dozen of those." At least my insanity goes to support a good company. I, umm... I don't suppose you need some extra hard drives?
Hmm... By the same token, you could say that that sort of mentality is why Germany (or Japan) is like it is today.
Of course, in both cases, it's much more complex than that. It should be noted that there was even a reconstruction in the South just like there was the post-war reconstruction of Germany or, if you'd rather, Japan. I'd even point out that the destruction of Germany and Japan was as great, or greater, than the levels done to the South - including economic impact and a per-capita loss of life.
Are you sure you want to argue it that way? It's not that I don't agree with you - it's just that I think there's probably a few better arguments to be made.
While what you say is true, judges don't necessarily have all that much power - except maybe dissolution and then only, maybe, if someone levies suit. The judge can not, for example, hold someone accountable if they are not legally accountable - as much as they may want to. They can find against them but there's a limit to what a judge can do. They can't just refuse to accept corporate status and hold the real parent-company accountable if they are not, in fact, legally liable.
And, I guess, that's probably a good thing. There's still a lot that they can do. There's just not a whole lot that that they can do about getting the right people and punishing them, not of their own volition. Judges don't really have that authority and I guess that's for the best - as nice as it would be to see them hammer on the appropriate people.
Basically, don't expect a whole lot and get your hopes up. I've filed for incorporation, through a lawyer, enough times that I can probably do the paperwork myself. While it does make things more complicated, it does offer a whole bunch of protections that are otherwise difficult to obtain. Having incorporated gives some benefits that can be used to do good things (or bad things). It's actually fairly easy to get incorporated and it isn't even expensive. With a bit of work, you can do it yourself. A LLC is limited in liability for a reason and there are all sorts of good things that can come along with that.
There are also non-profit, charitable, corporations that are not the same as some other charities. Judge me as you wish but, I'll give you one example...
I have a corporation that manages a trust. In this trust sits a number of assets. Because I feel the government is not very good at spending money and don't really want to give them a huge percentage of it when I die, I have it configured so that I don't. This corporation exists to manage assets so that they continue to make a profit. Those profits are then given to various groups and there's even an application policy/method that will allow non-profit (or otherwise eligible) groups to apply for support.
This will continue, so long as the US economy remains viable, in perpetuity, long after I am dead and gone. This organization, and it is not the only one - they're structured for different purposes and diversified to gain some additional protection, exists as its own entity. The assets in there are in there to ensure that they are not counted as my personal assets (they are not my personal assets any longer) for the purposes of taxation. When i die, the government doesn't get that giant chunk of my assets.
If they got that chunk of assets, they'd use it on a down payment to buy a bomber they neither need nor can truly afford. I might think different if, perhaps, they were going to use the money wisely. Instead, my money will keep doing charitable giving long after I'm dead and gone.
Yes, I could, if I wanted, employ myself at that group and continue to take assets from it. That's immoral. The assets no longer belong to me and I will not benefit from them, in any way, except that I am not given any additional tax burden because of them at current and they will not be a tax liability when I pass away.
That is tax avoidance, it is legal, I'd even argue that it's more moral than giving them just enough money to make a down-payment on a loan to buy weaponry they can ill afford and will only be used on those who least deserve it. To use the one in question, the one that I'm specifically thinking about, it puts (at current) three people into a nice private school by providing them a scholarship (and stipend) each year. This will continue to happen, long after I am dead, and nobody is making huge amounts of money from it - though there are financial managers who get to keep a percentage of the profits accrued by their active management. I am not one of those members or managers and I accept no salary with it.
I've been asked, off-list, what I'll do with the profits from my Tesla score. I bought 20
I had numerous patents and we did license (eventually - we were asked) that tech to others who wanted to compete in the industry. Mostly, we kept 'trade secrets.'
We never sued or stopped anyone. Hell, when we first licensed the tech - we didn't even charge much (I had no idea what to charge) so we just took what the company that licensed the tech was willing to offer and we got a percentage per use. We didn't get any profit from them using it in-house to develop with or on. We got paid when they got paid. It was never an issue, as far as I know, with anyone using it without license and we never needed to sue anyone or even consider it.
Then again, it was rather domain specific and fairly unique so it's not like people would have just started randomly using it. Mostly, we kept our software in-house and kept our tech in that. It's not like the software was meant for use outside the company (at that time). We did, eventually, license our software for use by certain companies but that often came with a person (or two) to train them, implement it, and whatnot. It was for those who wished to do on-going, in-house, pedestrian traffic modeling and included monitoring and the ability to gather some metrics. Unless you worked in one of those fields, it's unlikely that you'd have even wanted to use that math (or those methods) with anything.
As an aside, I'm kind of glad we didn't keep it totally locked down and were willing to license it as well as eventually enabling companies to use it in-house. Doing so enabled us to learn all sorts of interesting ways to implement and use the process. For example, one of the most interesting was a company that had us set it up for them - they wanted to use it to optimize traffic flow (which is mixed traffic) in a warehouse. They also used it in some not-so-ideal methods but that's not up to me to control. You're probably familiar with the company, they now have their own solutions - probably heavily cribbed from what we enabled for them quite some years ago.
At any rate, it lead to some additional business and actually resulted in us learning a few things and doing new and interesting things at our end. I can't really say that having them, or not, was a huge difference or anything. Even when a company had built something off of our process or (probably) cribbed from it, we never sued. It's unlikely that they were using it to compete with us or anything. After a certain amount of time passed, we did actually enable people who were competing with us in one form or another. As we did vehicular traffic modeling and not everything needed to be on a giant scale, as refined, and compute cycles/storage became less expensive - it became easier for a couple of folks working in a large municipality to do so on their own. There were also smaller companies - often doing projects much too small for us at this point.
Meh... Bludgeoning them with a patent just didn't seem the thing to do. More importantly, we could help them get things implemented and then make a few dollars from them as they kept going, grew, or even threw back ideas that needed to be implemented. We might have been eating the same meals but we weren't dining at the same dinner tables - if that makes sense. We got a few bucks from them, some ideas from them, and didn't have to go bludgeoning. I don't think it ever occurred to us - nor were we sitting on tech not in use or keeping it locked up.
So, I don't really have any issues with the patent system at a base level. I just wish it were implemented. If you're not using it, you should lose it - like a trademark. You should have a working implementation before it is granted. Things should be more specific and not just concepts - the idea of a single-button checkout should not have been granted. There should be a better way, end result, for prior art checking and what's reasonable to have concluded by someone in the field. There are other things but those are a few things that I think could be tweaked for better results. Of all of those, I think the worki
I'm glad I scrolled. I'd actually started one of my novellas.;-)
I don't think they're beyond repair. The ideas that they had were VERY forward thinking and some were great ideas. Instead of ending up with a tiger, you end up with a platypus... DMC had great ideas and, as mentioned elsewhere, it's disappointing that they never did really create anything that's good. By all measures, they should have been fantastic.
Instead, you get something that's slow, lumbering, awkward, unreliable, and bordering on unusable. Stack a GOOD engine in there, mated with a good transmission, and increase the stiffness, make the steering more robust, and throw some decent sized tires under it to get it more balanced. Then, maybe, I can see past the dysfunction of the doors, windows, ergonomics, and space usage.
The car really, really could have been so wonderful. It could have been everything you wanted in a sports car - including longevity. The end result was something that wasn't even suited to pick up groceries. I've been disappointed in them for a *very* long time. I've known some owners, some passionate fans, and have even driven a couple. Hell, I almost rescued one. Alas, I wasn't even willing to drag one out of a field - for fear that doing so would cause additional damage.
The idea of steel and fiberglass? Fantastic. The results? Well, you get a platypus. Cute but insane and, for the most part, not serving a whole lot of function. It's really disappointing. Also, I've only seen one of the movies and not in a long time - I don't even know if I ever finished watching it. I really did want to like the car and remember being so excited awaiting the release and seeing one in real life. I also remember the disappointment when that did happen...
The Ferrari, model? Is it the GT 250, convertible? Mileage? Condition? Pics? I think the 400 (what was it called, Superamerica?) was rather neat - I've a friend with one but I think it's a couple of years newer.
I, too, dabble in the market and have a very nice (in my opinion) stable of vehicles but I'm not your typical collector. I don't buy to own. I buy to use. I've quite a nice collection and am rather proud of the fact that I own not one single trailer queen - each and every one is not just drivable but does get a workout from time to time.
I'm fairly well-to-do but not obscenely wealthy. I hire a mechanic who comes in all day on Saturdays. He keeps things in great repair. Some of them are a bit finicky, to the point that that's why I have him come in on Saturday. It gives me the next day to enjoy things that have been worked on and I usually go to a show on Thursday nights so I can verify on Sunday and then go out on Thursday. I do own a couple of car trailers but nothing gets hauled to the show - they get driven.
And, as mentioned, I don't really have anything that's too outlandish. I guess the most expensive/prized would be a factory restored '78 911 in Targa trim. However, one of my prized is actually a '88 Accord LX that I had sent back to Japan to be restored. It shipped out from the West Coast and, when it came back, I drove it back across the country - taking a couple of weeks to do so. My collection is along those lines and serves those purposes. That said, got more specifics on the Ferrari?
My understanding is that, back in ye olden days, they were able to make the earliest race/adventure/bets where they drove across the country, through areas where an automobile had never been and thus had no gasoline stations, because the refining process was not that uncommon and was used for some medical processes. They'd usually be able to buy some from the chemist (pharmacist) as they went. If the chemist didn't have some then he could usually get some ordered. It was just refined from the kerosene that was already being used or made from bitumen (I think???).
To the people who replied, getting the exact octane isn't really essential. While it helps, it's never really all that exact anyhow, and the vehicle will knock and (maybe) run fairly poorly but it should still run and should be able to get up to speed. Assuming it's just a tank full or less, there will probably be no permanent damage done even if the octane isn't exactly right.
Also, given the age of the DeLorean, it's unlikely that it was designed to run with MTBE and running it with that might have gummed up the lines and reduced performance a bit. Assuming that they didn't then leave the fuel in the system for long periods of time, after returning, then they should be all set. They could also just run a fuel treatment (look for the marine treatment products - I've had the most luck with them) and be all set with that.
It should be noted, that the above makes it hold up (you'd think) when exposed to the elements. However, there's a remarkable amount of degradation (in my experience which is notably limited) in the rest of the running gear. When kept idle, I've found that they seem to rust fairly quickly where there is metal - like the running gear. Oh, the body is fine. The frame, where exposed, rusted as did the various underpinnings.
I should note that my experience is limited. However, the few that I've looked into (that were not kept as well as they should be) have all suffered more so than I'd expect - given the duration and levels of exposure. I've only looked into a few in that condition and only one of them was looked at in great detail.
The car was a collection of mostly good ideas, done horribly wrong, and it shows in the numbers. They're anemic, handle like a lumbering giraffe, and are neither efficient or sporty. They are, on the other hand, shiny.
The thing is, with the way the car was designed, they should have (could have) been so much better. I'd love to see one with a less mushy suspension, a beefy engine married to a nice manual transmission, and more robust braking, steering components, and better matched tires. The cars really could have been awesome. Ugly, but awesome. The idea of the stainless is fantastic. The use of fiberglass on the underbody was genius. The interior could have been fantastic.
But no... Heh... Let's hope you don't need to roll the windows down or get in/out in a hurry. I've had friends who owned them and have driven them, I almost rescued one but it was too far gone. They're rather unique but, as it turned out, they have just the redeeming quality of aesthetics and those are entirely subjective. I find them ugly enough to be neat and, as I said, I'd almost rescued one but did not. The engine was seized and I was unable to get it to turn over. If I could have just done that, and not much else, then I'd have rescued it - even at the stupidly high price, just to make sure that it was kept alive. Alas, things did not turn out well and I imagine it's still in situ, in a farmer's field, outside of Winston-Salem, NC.
They really could have been such great cars. They had such great potential. The ideas that went into it were groundbreaking. Somehow, it ended up being pretty much the exact opposite of what it should/could have been. Add to that the financial problems (a given, considering the actual results of those ideas) and the way the owner attempted to rectify those financial issues and you get a huge disappointment - something I've been disappointed in for a long time.
I've made it a point, however, to be fairly polite in my response. You appear to be quite a fan and a knowledgeable one. I can understand, accept, and sympathize. I'm guessing you own one or more? In my experience, the fans are rather dedicated. It's not unusual to find people who own one and a half or have one that is "nearly complete" tucked away in storage as well as a second one that's much less complete. They do seem to be a dedicated group and that, in and of itself, is awesome.
The car really should have been so much more than what it was. I seem to recall a documentary (or a part of one) that went into the car and there was quite a bit of fuckery that were involved at nearly all stages of the process. DMC really didn't have a whole lot of chances for success, for lots of reasons, and the resulting creation is less than impressive in my humble opinion. It's sadly so - I'd have loved for it to be everything it could have been, a success, and the company still in business today. What is great is that there's an awesome, dedicated, fan-base who keep them alive. I've encountered a few, however, who were a bit more passionate than might be justified and they were a bit too biased to accept the failings, blemishes, or faults. If nothing else, they're passionate.
I don't know where you stand on the line so I'll treat lightly - and be respectful.;-) The thing is, I
I think you're not giving it full potential. Getting him out to see might allow for, shall we say, certain "disposal" methods that are a bit infamous. Looked at with certain light, you just have to imagine that they're disposing something instead of retrieving something, no? This might actually solve some problems. Which problems those are, specifically, is an exercise for the reader's imagination.
I'm not sure why but your country went from post-WWII all the way to Thatcher with good speed. You've hit a bit of a rough patch in the past 30 years.
As an aside, I made a post last night that responded to someone who was suggesting that "fiscal conservatives" (US politics) should be joining with the Libertarian party because the Republicans were no longer fiscal conservatives. I've left it open for them to reply, before writing my novella, but I do have said novella mentally prepared. If presented with the opportunity, I may take one of several tacks. I'll likely go with helpful, polite, and educational. But it'd be sorely tempting to go another route. It's as if people have chosen to ignore the "liberty" aspect of the title and simply assumed that anyone who is fiscally conservative (regardless of reason) is a good fit for the party, belongs in the party, and that such is actually a primary motive of the entirety of the party.
Ah well... I'll have to see where it goes and if I'm given the invitation to continue. I actually skipped typing out the novella by default and, instead, asked if they were interested in having more information. I know, I know... I was tired.
I believe they've just made new molds for some of it. They're not made using the same techniques but the end results are similar enough that it doesn't' matter to people, I guess. I am a rather dedicated automobile aficionado but, I gotta be honest here, these cars don't really have much going for them other than the outward appearances.
At any rate, I'm nearly positive that I've read that (at considerable expense) they're able to make much (all?) the molding. I seem to recall that there was a bit of an ado about both it and, in particular, a bit of a row that needed licensing specifically about knobs and some markings on the recreations? I believe that this was due, in part or in whole, to them being trademarked and the company not having the license and some dispute about the license ownership and transfer of rights - did they have the rights to authorize recreations and things of that nature.
I want to say that it was in Jalopnik but it might have been in dead-tree form in Automobile or Road & Track. Alas, I still subscribe to quite a few dead-tree publications. I believe that my dead-tree subscription makes me eligible for electronic versions? I've never really enjoyed those and, perhaps worse, I've not actually tried to make use of the electronic versions in a lot of years. Even though I don't really like a tablet, they do make "good enough" consumption devices and I might even enjoy the electronic versions on a tablet if I tried them.
As I noted above - other than a stainless body that was heavy and made for shitty handling characteristics, they were anemic, unreliable, costly, and had no redeeming qualities other than the design - and that's VERY depending on taste. I almost (as mentioned above) bought a used one from the middle of a field but there was no way that I was going to do so given the condition it was in. I spent a few weekends getting my hands dirty and working to get it running but it was to no avail.
I haven't looked at the new ones but the old ones were rather anemic. They came with a fairly wimpy 6 in them and were actually really low-powered. Absurdly so... They were poor mechanically, they were underpowered, they had the fit and finish one would expect from an 80s American car, they had poor handling characteristics, they had no redeeming qualities OTHER than their look.
That said, I almost bought one at one time. The engine was seized, the running gear a bit rusty (but not the body), and would have modified the hell out of it - had I been able to get to turn over and out of the field on its own power - that was the agreement I'd made with the owner. I put a full three weekends into it, I couldn't get the engine to turn over, and trying to pull on it would probably have racked the car. It was mired in what had been mud and had been left there, stuck, for years by his son. The engine seized during this time and so I never bought it.
It simply wasn't worth the amount they were asking for it. They thought it was worth a fortune - in the late 1990s, early 2000s. Somewhere, outside of Winston-Salem, there's probably still a farm where you can see a DeLorean in the back field. Even now that I have a few more dollars than I had then, I'd still not buy it. There is actually a collector's market for them but my collection is not predicated on a market. Any vehicles that happen to have a collectible value is purely chance. I own a lot of vehicles and each one is because I like it and have a purpose (sometimes vague or horribly wrong) for it. One of my happiest pieces is a fully restored Accord LX from 1988. Yes, it's every bit as awesome as one might think. However, it's hardly a collector's car though there is a bit of a dedicated market for them.
No, really... Sort of... I'm a secular Buddhist and sure as hell not a monk. But, I can certainly look like one. I do actually own a few sets of monk's robes (kasaya - I think that's spelled properly). I also travel. I like to travel a lot and sometimes I go places that I probably should not go. Wearing the kasaya has lots and lots of benefits - people are genuinely happy to see you pass by, if I don't want to talk to someone I can just point at my lips and smile and shake my head, and nobody every (normally) harms a monk - they might be a bad ass at kung-fu! I am not a bad ass at kung-fu, I suspect if I tried to look like so then I'd feel both stupid and look stupid(er). I did take all available levels of MCT, so I guess some folks might think I'm a bad ass but, really, I'm mostly a dawdling old man these days. I'm quite harmless, I assure you.
Heh... So, yeah - I think I've mentioned it before here but probably not too often. I don't want other people to figure it out. I did buy the robes when I went on refuge and I really am a Buddhist - I'm just not a very good Buddhist, I'm a secular Buddhist, and I'm sure as hell not a monk. It was then that I noticed, when traveling around afterwards, that everybody changed how they respond to you if you're wearing your robes (I'm pretty sure they're spelled something like kasaya). I do not have them with me on my current travels.
Shh! Don't tell anyone. They'll all start doing it, it will look like there are millions of monks traveling, and eventually someone will figure it out. If everyone did it, it would ruin it. Also, sometimes you're mistaken for a Krishna. That's generally okay too. Krishna practitioners have been pretty cool people, the ones that I've met, and I've enjoyed talking with them and have learned a little about their beliefs. I even learned one of their prayers. Err... It's not exactly hard. "Hare Krishna Hare Krishna Krishna Krishna Hare Hare Hare Rama Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare." I think that's the right order...
Slashdot Mirror
Pretty much this. I'd like to point out, embarrassing though it might be, that I can code badly in a few languages. Worse, I plan on brushing up (and am doing so) my skills and learning a couple of new languages. I'll then give that code away (a handful of people will use it, ever) and hate me for it.
No, I can code poorly with any tools you give me. In fact, I probably will.
There's problems with everything... There are security issues in everything. There will be bugs so long as we have humans writing software. When we have machines writing software, there will still be bugs. Why? Well, because it will have been a human that wrote that machine's code to begin with. With bugs come security issues. Without best practices come security issues. Without good education come security issues.
Good, bug-free, and secure start in the chair and before a line of code is written. No, I don't know this because of my own individual performance. I know this because I hired good, professional, programmers to do things that I could not. They were not only good but they were instructional - if you wanted to put the effort into learning.
I am reminded of a grandpa story... I'll try to make it brief.
We had a secretary who was pretty bright but she wanted to change jobs and do something more interesting. We didn't need anyone in a new job that she was suited for. Well, she decided she was going to be a programmer. So, probably mostly because she was cute and single, she was "allowed" to spend time with the programmers. She started to learn, started to practice, and damned if she wasn't writing code in a little while.
Oh, it gets a little better... She eventually learned to code quite well, just from asking good question - this is about the bit about the programmers being instructional - if you wanted to put the effort in. She actually turned out to be pretty good. We sent her to a few classes, she changed jobs, and actually ended up in QA but our QA was a little different in that they usually tried to fix the bugs themselves. We didn't actually have anyone who had the job title of QA. We just had people who filled that role because that's what they did best and were happiest doing. They largely organized themselves.
At any rate, I'll avoid the novella but they really did teach you a lot if you wanted to learn. Yes, I wrote the code base. Yes, I maintained that code and added to that code for years. It was badly written C but it worked. It wasn't for public consumption or anything so it was okay. Still, things grew and I handed off the code and it was eventually all reworked in C++. I was not ever a good programmer but I learned a lot of good things - many forgotten, and (more importantly) I learned to ask good questions. Well, I think they're good. They must be? I get the answers that I need.
While I am not (nor should I be confused with) a Republican - I think you'll find your logical fallacy is that of the excluded middle. Small does not mean absolute least amount. Those would be the minarchists. They are not generally Republicans. We have some in my party, however. I'm inclined to agree in principle - I'm just not certain that their ideal is reasonable or would be as effective as they like. They're usually proponents of a strong, very strong, but minimal government. Some are actually in favor of a weak and minimal government, they're not far from anarchists and I tend to think of them in similar manners.
Oh, they're great ideals and would be fantastic in an ideal world and that's all good. It's just unrealistic, never going to happen - ever, and is silly to even propose it in a serious conversation about where the lines should be drawn.
It's not their own oil but I seem to recall a company called Neste Oil has a bunch of refineries there. It was on NPR not that long ago. They don't have their own oil but they refine a whole bunch of it.
Umm... That's according to NPR and I'm a bit too lazy to Google. I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure that they do process billions of dollars worth of oil. I believe they do a lot of Norway's oil? My memory is really not that good so feel free to Google.
How much of an impact this has on the economy, I do not know nor will I speculate as I am unqualified. I just happen to recollect the name Neste and thus I remember the story. Err... It was the afternoon show with that old lady, I've forgotten her name. I still manage to listen to MPBN because they're on the 'net. It works out well enough even if I'm in Florida for the winter.
Texas has its own oil, its own electrical infrastructure (really), a bunch of bases with military equipment, and is the size of many other nations. They're also REALLY particular about their young women, blond or not. No, "we" might let them have the Californian girls but probably not Texans. That might make them finally revolt and, contrary to popular opinion, that would probably be a bad thing.
Have you ever SEEN Texas? Have you ever seen an angry Texan? Do you not have history books and newspapers in your neighborhood? This is Texas, they don't even mind a "good killin,' now and then." They also seem hell bent on killing anyone who kills one of them. While that might seem significant, it means we'd have to round up all the blonds in Texas (just the natural blonds are going to be a handful), disarm THEM, disarm their brothers, fathers, and boyfriends, and then somehow make it out without killing ANY of them - because if we kill one, it's gonna escalate and we'll have to kill them all.
It's Texas. They don't actually issue you a firearm at birth. Nope. They issue you two, 'cause you got two hands. They probably give 'em a whole box of bullets, funded by the State, for every birthday.
Put it this way, Texas likes killing people so much that they've actually convinced people to make them (and sell to them) deadly chemicals. Why? I'm not really sure. They weren't going to but then, I presume, they sent Chuck Norris over to have a talk with 'em and he's a Texas Ranger.
You know that slogan, "Don't mess with Texas?" It often has a picture of an Angry Texan and a couple of revolvers? Yeah, that's actually from an anti-littering campaign. Dude, I don't generally go to Texas but I'm assuming they'll KILL YOU for littering. If you want to send the Texas blonds to the Middle East, you're gonna have to round 'em up yourself. I'm not only not helping you do it, I'm not even going to come save your ass when they "catch hold" of you.
No, son... When you get old enough, you realize there are certain things you shouldn't fuck with. One of those things is a hornet's nest. Another one is Texans. I'll remind you again, they LIKE killing. They LAUGH at you if you propose that they stop doing it. Hell, they get offended if you suggest that they stop killing. And you want to go take their blond women? I can only assume you're still a child. Good luck with that. Texas has oil. They're gonna be really, really mad if you try to take their blond women.
Hell, they might be mad if you take their Black (Colored) or Hispanic (Chino) women. No, they're gonna be mad. Why? One word for you, son. Texas.
Heh... Funny you should say that.
Umm... I just *did* make that argument. Well, not argument, statements of facts. What's funny is everyone wants to blame the US when they could be blaming themselves. More importantly, rather than blame either one of those two groups, how about blaming the guilty parties - blame the folks who are committing the atrocities. Imagine that? Assigning blame where it belongs. Sadly, that's actually a foreign concept and ludicrous. We can't, you know, blame the people chopping off heads.
Oh, I understand why they're not blaming them. Blaming them would mean they'd have to do something about it and might get their heads chopped off. They're quite understandably afraid of that. It might also mean accepting some accountability for their forefathers and cleaning up their mistakes. It's much easier (and safer!) to just blame America.
Umm... You know, this problem stems from the colonization and resulting arbitrarily drawn lines by the League of Nations, right? The US had no part in any of that - including, declining multiple requests to participate in the League of Nations. The colonization, abuses, and then setting up lines where no previous lines had existed and giving people authority where they should have none is what caused this. The meddling by the US hasn't helped it but it sure as hell isn't the cause.
History is longer than just 15 years. It's fun to blame the US and all - and I'm certainly not saying the US has helped as much as they like to think they have. However, blaming this on the US is rather silly. The situation is there because of colonization and border creation - and the ensuing power structures that were doomed to failure. The fault lies with the people committing the atrocities, however.
Blaming the US is borderline mentally retarded and shows a complete lack of knowledge of history. The blame doesn't belong with the colonizers and border makers. They made the situation exist but the blame still lies with the folks committing the atrocities. But, I guess it's easier than fighting the people committing the atrocities so blame away. The US is surely used to it now.
Hmm... Welcome to the United States. :/ We've been gutting our educational system, middle class, and liberties for years. I'd say you'll get used to it but you probably won't. It will be typical and accepted by the generation that follows your generation.
Oh, I'd type a novella explaining how important it is to make changes and (maybe) even how to work on making those changes but I'm going to skip it. Nobody ever listens and the next generation will just call you a Luddite anyhow. Just wait until they start encroaching on your personal freedoms and you have your fellow citizens telling you that you don't need those rights and that having those rights is dangerous, a throwback, or enabling unlawful actors. Hell, they might even accuse you of aiding and abetting those unlawful actors - just for wanting your liberties, enumerated rights, and honesty.
No, you never really get used to it and typing out a novella won't help you any. There's likely a subset of your country that agrees with these cuts. They'll be vocal if you work against them or aren't seen as joining them. It gets worse. I assume, given history, that it's cyclical. The pendulum appears to swing both directions but it is often REALLY bad when the pendulum swings wildly. No, a novella won't help.
I seen to recall that not only did Microsoft get their tech and a bunch of patents but that, somehow, they were able to write down the loss as more than what they'd actually paid for the company. I also am sort of remembering that Nokia can re-enter the market sometime soon and that they had/have a really strange deal with Microsoft that has some oddities in licensing the tech, name, and that sort of thing. So, we may see them again but probably under a different name (for their phones) and probably not with Windows on them.
Oddly, I have a Windows phone and actually bought it on purpose - I wasn't drunk or high or anything. Well, I might have been a little high or something but I don't remember being so. I guess I can put 10 on it but I have yet to do so. I really don't use my phone for anything much other than texting, emailing, browsing, and making phone calls. It works quite well for what I use it for. It is not a Nokia.
It's got insurance and I own it to be driven. When it breaks, I'll fix it or get a new one. It's just money, they'll make more. Yes it's "bespoke" but that just means I've got some extra sport package features, unusual trim and tires, and some different colors. Oh, and a nice stereo with a fancy HUD that's a little different from the standard model. ;-)
So, drive it like you stole it. 'Cause if my insurance company asks, that's what I'm gonna tell 'em you did. I kid... I kid... My license, thus any vehicle I own or drive, is covered by $1m USD. It's full coverage so you'd be covered, in full, even on the track. They're well aware that I race but I don't race anything expensive enough to actually make claims on it. I could and they'd just charge me more money. It's a private insurance company and already a bit pricey but not really that bad when you look at what it covers.
It's probably not the optimal choice for the Golden Road. The engine is blown in what *would* be my optimal choice, for what I own. I've been thinking about a WRX or a Mini. I've seen some WRX after-market jobs (you buy it and send it directly off to them) that I'm impressed with. I also seem to recall that there's a company that will tweak your Mini to get some 700 ponies. No, I have no idea how long the engine will last in one. I'm assuming that 20k would be lucky. There's a few very nicely done up WRX models, specifically configured to rally, but I'd then probably not want to push them as far and as hard as I can.
If you can't push it and enjoy it, why own it? So, by that token, I'd be sitting beside you and urging you to go faster. We should probably outfit it with a roll cage, better seats, and five point restraint harnesses (and wear helmets) if we're going to really push it. While I am certainly game, I really think that'd be better done on the Golden Road and with a better vehicle. Putting the 6 on Daytona would be a lot of fun, however. I'm pretty sure that either of them would make them shit a brick.
Oh, and we could look on innocently when they're reviewing the data... That would be also awesome. Yes, I don't think you should be forced to go it alone! As such, I'm afraid I'll have to go with you.
"No, sir, this says you hit 186 miles an hour."
"Oh, that? Yeah, that has to be some mistake."
"No, I don't think so sir. It says here that you maintained that speed for nearly 45 minutes and had lateral motion of greater than 1G for 37% of the time."
"Oh, you mean THAT. Yeah, I was outrunning the cops that day. Does this insurance plan also cover bullet holes?"
Hmm... Assuming I shift well, I should be able to pull about a 12.5 quarter mile. That should almost certainly get their notice. So, we could have some fun there. I'm liking the idea of a WRX or Cooper, tweaked into a roaring machine that sounds like it has come from the bowels of hell, and the Golden Road. That should, bare minimum, get us some interesting letters and emails. Even more fun will be doing it as Uber drivers. I promise, you can drive first and I'll leave you a stellar review.
Hmm... You'd not praise a car for being a good car? I'm not sure that I understand why you'd think the creation was not deserving praise. Much like you praise good art, the art itself, yet still have praise for the artist, so too can you praise (or damn) a device for its inherent qualities. It's not like there is a value of praise where there's none left for the creator or user of a tool. I dare say, we humans praise a whole host of tools all the time. Everything from programming languages to operating systems to browsers are praised or damned here, on this site, on a daily basis.
I don't think that qualifies as asinine to praise a tool for having the virtues that make it a good tool. It's not like you can't also praise the tool's creator.
Hmm... So you've owned a computer for no longer than 15 years. That doesn't discount your views, by default, but it does mean you're still wet behind the ears and some folks will value your views in light of that. That said, I like NewEgg and shop there frequently. I've bought a lot of computers, to be made or pre-assembled, from them and have had great interactions with them.
I could, I guess, save a couple of dollars from shopping around but I'm happy going through NewEgg. I've had good service and support and will continue to shop with them just because I tend to stay where I am - if I'm happy. I'm happy there and that means I'll keep shopping there. It's not exclusive, nor is it not subject to change, but my tech shopping is done there the vast majority of time and I would need a good reason to change that behavior.
I understand that they treat their employees well and pay them well but I have a sample size that totals one for that. At the same time, I've not noticed any great commotion to do with their treatment of their employees. So, there's that.
I'm glad that they have a policy of standing up to patent trolls - I'm not really sure how much of an effect that really has. I mean, how often are they attacked by trolls? It just doesn't seem like they are producing a whole lot (I think they have one brand that they own - that I know of) so I'm not sure how much chance they'll get to act on that. It's nice that they do and is a good benefit to my already shopping there.
Hmm... I've used the site since the early days. I don't remember how I found it but I think (and I'm not positive) they kept showing up on a price comparison site that I used back then. No, I have no idea how long ago that was but they were a small outfit. I've only purchased hardware for myself and others on the site - not for business. When I still owned my company, I went directly through Sun or (often) through a company called CDW. They've been in business for a long time, I highly recommend them for business account usage. I've no affiliation (to the best of my knowledge) but my company was a very happy customer for a very long time.
That said, I used my first programmable computer in 1969 or so. I don't think I owned my own until the 1980s (A TRS-80 was the first one, as I recall, but it might have been a VIC-20 that I owned first - my memory is fuzzy.) I've put together loads of my own computers but I prefer them at least partially assembled now. That's where NewEgg comes in. They've got a decent selection, fine prices, and good service and support. In all these years, I can make not one complaint.
There... I figure I'll add a few years to your experience. They've only been around since 2001 and you can't be a very experienced user if you've only ever used computers that you've put together on their site. I have lots of experience and lots of history with a whole bunch of sites - and I still make use of NewEgg with an alarming frequency.
It should be noted, I'd have no problems using them for business purchases. However, I sold in 2007 and was still using CDW (more often than not) at the time. I'm not sure how well NewEgg would have handled a desktop refresh of a couple hundred PCs at the time. I'm not sure how well equipped they were to deal with forklift upgrades at the time. I'd not be surprised, at all, to find out that they're quite adequate at it today. I'm not sure that I'd have trusted them (longevity matters sometimes) at the time.
Pretty much this. Unlike others and probably for no good reason other than I am a creature of habit - it's not even so much about the trolls, but that's a nice value added benefit, I generally shop at NewEgg. I'm not horribly concerned about price and the prices are usually close-enough. Unless it's broken, I only buy what I wanted, so nothing gets returned and I don't have to deal with their restocking fee.
When I've had an issue, I've had no problem returning it. That's seldom. I'm also honest about it - if I broke it then I don't just return it. If I buy a cheap device, instead of the more expensive device, and it doesn't work as well as I was hoping then I don't return it - so long as it works at all.
So, I pretty much just go to NewEgg for tech gear. I also buy quite a bit of stuff from them. I'm always buying something new - I really need to unsubscribe from their mailings. I have the impulse control of a five year old and the bank account big enough to make it a problem. Fortunately, I'm not a hoarder and I'm not a huge fan of clutter. I'm always able to find some kind soul who's willing (often eager) to take my tech hand-me-downs. Given my obscene hardware refresh rates, impulse buys, and inability to remember what I was thinking when I bought half the stuff - I probably buy enough stuff to keep a good sized group of geeks amused, full time.
Ah well... This won't actually change my buying habits. I pretty much just go to NewEgg and buy there already. It's very rare for me to buy hardware or tech items on Amazon and, if I do, it's probably a book or another damned impulse buy. Fortunately, maybe, the missus is a budding geek and will help me make use of the hardware. She's also pretty good with money, or so it seems so far, so maybe that will help - at least maybe she'll feel compelled to help me make use of some of those things that I buy.
"Oh, look. Those hard drives are dirt cheap and a good brand. They've got good reviews, are just a year old now, and they're on sale? Yes, yes I can probably use ten of them. No, ship it today - it's important!" Sadly, I just had that conversation in my head a few days ago. I did (still sort of do) have a plan for those hard drives - except I have absolutely no need for them. A plan? Yes. A need? Not so much.
Ah well... If you've ever wondered who those stupid emailings targeted? I'm that guy. You can unsubscribe. I probably should have done so years ago. "Oh, nice, they've got USB thumb drives on sale! I need a half dozen of those." At least my insanity goes to support a good company. I, umm... I don't suppose you need some extra hard drives?
I know, you should patent the idea!
Hmm... By the same token, you could say that that sort of mentality is why Germany (or Japan) is like it is today.
Of course, in both cases, it's much more complex than that. It should be noted that there was even a reconstruction in the South just like there was the post-war reconstruction of Germany or, if you'd rather, Japan. I'd even point out that the destruction of Germany and Japan was as great, or greater, than the levels done to the South - including economic impact and a per-capita loss of life.
Are you sure you want to argue it that way? It's not that I don't agree with you - it's just that I think there's probably a few better arguments to be made.
While what you say is true, judges don't necessarily have all that much power - except maybe dissolution and then only, maybe, if someone levies suit. The judge can not, for example, hold someone accountable if they are not legally accountable - as much as they may want to. They can find against them but there's a limit to what a judge can do. They can't just refuse to accept corporate status and hold the real parent-company accountable if they are not, in fact, legally liable.
And, I guess, that's probably a good thing. There's still a lot that they can do. There's just not a whole lot that that they can do about getting the right people and punishing them, not of their own volition. Judges don't really have that authority and I guess that's for the best - as nice as it would be to see them hammer on the appropriate people.
Basically, don't expect a whole lot and get your hopes up. I've filed for incorporation, through a lawyer, enough times that I can probably do the paperwork myself. While it does make things more complicated, it does offer a whole bunch of protections that are otherwise difficult to obtain. Having incorporated gives some benefits that can be used to do good things (or bad things). It's actually fairly easy to get incorporated and it isn't even expensive. With a bit of work, you can do it yourself. A LLC is limited in liability for a reason and there are all sorts of good things that can come along with that.
There are also non-profit, charitable, corporations that are not the same as some other charities. Judge me as you wish but, I'll give you one example...
I have a corporation that manages a trust. In this trust sits a number of assets. Because I feel the government is not very good at spending money and don't really want to give them a huge percentage of it when I die, I have it configured so that I don't. This corporation exists to manage assets so that they continue to make a profit. Those profits are then given to various groups and there's even an application policy/method that will allow non-profit (or otherwise eligible) groups to apply for support.
This will continue, so long as the US economy remains viable, in perpetuity, long after I am dead and gone. This organization, and it is not the only one - they're structured for different purposes and diversified to gain some additional protection, exists as its own entity. The assets in there are in there to ensure that they are not counted as my personal assets (they are not my personal assets any longer) for the purposes of taxation. When i die, the government doesn't get that giant chunk of my assets.
If they got that chunk of assets, they'd use it on a down payment to buy a bomber they neither need nor can truly afford. I might think different if, perhaps, they were going to use the money wisely. Instead, my money will keep doing charitable giving long after I'm dead and gone.
Yes, I could, if I wanted, employ myself at that group and continue to take assets from it. That's immoral. The assets no longer belong to me and I will not benefit from them, in any way, except that I am not given any additional tax burden because of them at current and they will not be a tax liability when I pass away.
That is tax avoidance, it is legal, I'd even argue that it's more moral than giving them just enough money to make a down-payment on a loan to buy weaponry they can ill afford and will only be used on those who least deserve it. To use the one in question, the one that I'm specifically thinking about, it puts (at current) three people into a nice private school by providing them a scholarship (and stipend) each year. This will continue to happen, long after I am dead, and nobody is making huge amounts of money from it - though there are financial managers who get to keep a percentage of the profits accrued by their active management. I am not one of those members or managers and I accept no salary with it.
I've been asked, off-list, what I'll do with the profits from my Tesla score. I bought 20
I had numerous patents and we did license (eventually - we were asked) that tech to others who wanted to compete in the industry. Mostly, we kept 'trade secrets.'
We never sued or stopped anyone. Hell, when we first licensed the tech - we didn't even charge much (I had no idea what to charge) so we just took what the company that licensed the tech was willing to offer and we got a percentage per use. We didn't get any profit from them using it in-house to develop with or on. We got paid when they got paid. It was never an issue, as far as I know, with anyone using it without license and we never needed to sue anyone or even consider it.
Then again, it was rather domain specific and fairly unique so it's not like people would have just started randomly using it. Mostly, we kept our software in-house and kept our tech in that. It's not like the software was meant for use outside the company (at that time). We did, eventually, license our software for use by certain companies but that often came with a person (or two) to train them, implement it, and whatnot. It was for those who wished to do on-going, in-house, pedestrian traffic modeling and included monitoring and the ability to gather some metrics. Unless you worked in one of those fields, it's unlikely that you'd have even wanted to use that math (or those methods) with anything.
As an aside, I'm kind of glad we didn't keep it totally locked down and were willing to license it as well as eventually enabling companies to use it in-house. Doing so enabled us to learn all sorts of interesting ways to implement and use the process. For example, one of the most interesting was a company that had us set it up for them - they wanted to use it to optimize traffic flow (which is mixed traffic) in a warehouse. They also used it in some not-so-ideal methods but that's not up to me to control. You're probably familiar with the company, they now have their own solutions - probably heavily cribbed from what we enabled for them quite some years ago.
At any rate, it lead to some additional business and actually resulted in us learning a few things and doing new and interesting things at our end. I can't really say that having them, or not, was a huge difference or anything. Even when a company had built something off of our process or (probably) cribbed from it, we never sued. It's unlikely that they were using it to compete with us or anything. After a certain amount of time passed, we did actually enable people who were competing with us in one form or another. As we did vehicular traffic modeling and not everything needed to be on a giant scale, as refined, and compute cycles/storage became less expensive - it became easier for a couple of folks working in a large municipality to do so on their own. There were also smaller companies - often doing projects much too small for us at this point.
Meh... Bludgeoning them with a patent just didn't seem the thing to do. More importantly, we could help them get things implemented and then make a few dollars from them as they kept going, grew, or even threw back ideas that needed to be implemented. We might have been eating the same meals but we weren't dining at the same dinner tables - if that makes sense. We got a few bucks from them, some ideas from them, and didn't have to go bludgeoning. I don't think it ever occurred to us - nor were we sitting on tech not in use or keeping it locked up.
So, I don't really have any issues with the patent system at a base level. I just wish it were implemented. If you're not using it, you should lose it - like a trademark. You should have a working implementation before it is granted. Things should be more specific and not just concepts - the idea of a single-button checkout should not have been granted. There should be a better way, end result, for prior art checking and what's reasonable to have concluded by someone in the field. There are other things but those are a few things that I think could be tweaked for better results. Of all of those, I think the worki
I'm glad I scrolled. I'd actually started one of my novellas. ;-)
I don't think they're beyond repair. The ideas that they had were VERY forward thinking and some were great ideas. Instead of ending up with a tiger, you end up with a platypus... DMC had great ideas and, as mentioned elsewhere, it's disappointing that they never did really create anything that's good. By all measures, they should have been fantastic.
Instead, you get something that's slow, lumbering, awkward, unreliable, and bordering on unusable. Stack a GOOD engine in there, mated with a good transmission, and increase the stiffness, make the steering more robust, and throw some decent sized tires under it to get it more balanced. Then, maybe, I can see past the dysfunction of the doors, windows, ergonomics, and space usage.
The car really, really could have been so wonderful. It could have been everything you wanted in a sports car - including longevity. The end result was something that wasn't even suited to pick up groceries. I've been disappointed in them for a *very* long time. I've known some owners, some passionate fans, and have even driven a couple. Hell, I almost rescued one. Alas, I wasn't even willing to drag one out of a field - for fear that doing so would cause additional damage.
The idea of steel and fiberglass? Fantastic. The results? Well, you get a platypus. Cute but insane and, for the most part, not serving a whole lot of function. It's really disappointing. Also, I've only seen one of the movies and not in a long time - I don't even know if I ever finished watching it. I really did want to like the car and remember being so excited awaiting the release and seeing one in real life. I also remember the disappointment when that did happen...
The Ferrari, model? Is it the GT 250, convertible? Mileage? Condition? Pics? I think the 400 (what was it called, Superamerica?) was rather neat - I've a friend with one but I think it's a couple of years newer.
I, too, dabble in the market and have a very nice (in my opinion) stable of vehicles but I'm not your typical collector. I don't buy to own. I buy to use. I've quite a nice collection and am rather proud of the fact that I own not one single trailer queen - each and every one is not just drivable but does get a workout from time to time.
I'm fairly well-to-do but not obscenely wealthy. I hire a mechanic who comes in all day on Saturdays. He keeps things in great repair. Some of them are a bit finicky, to the point that that's why I have him come in on Saturday. It gives me the next day to enjoy things that have been worked on and I usually go to a show on Thursday nights so I can verify on Sunday and then go out on Thursday. I do own a couple of car trailers but nothing gets hauled to the show - they get driven.
And, as mentioned, I don't really have anything that's too outlandish. I guess the most expensive/prized would be a factory restored '78 911 in Targa trim. However, one of my prized is actually a '88 Accord LX that I had sent back to Japan to be restored. It shipped out from the West Coast and, when it came back, I drove it back across the country - taking a couple of weeks to do so. My collection is along those lines and serves those purposes. That said, got more specifics on the Ferrari?
My understanding is that, back in ye olden days, they were able to make the earliest race/adventure/bets where they drove across the country, through areas where an automobile had never been and thus had no gasoline stations, because the refining process was not that uncommon and was used for some medical processes. They'd usually be able to buy some from the chemist (pharmacist) as they went. If the chemist didn't have some then he could usually get some ordered. It was just refined from the kerosene that was already being used or made from bitumen (I think???).
To the people who replied, getting the exact octane isn't really essential. While it helps, it's never really all that exact anyhow, and the vehicle will knock and (maybe) run fairly poorly but it should still run and should be able to get up to speed. Assuming it's just a tank full or less, there will probably be no permanent damage done even if the octane isn't exactly right.
Also, given the age of the DeLorean, it's unlikely that it was designed to run with MTBE and running it with that might have gummed up the lines and reduced performance a bit. Assuming that they didn't then leave the fuel in the system for long periods of time, after returning, then they should be all set. They could also just run a fuel treatment (look for the marine treatment products - I've had the most luck with them) and be all set with that.
It should be noted, that the above makes it hold up (you'd think) when exposed to the elements. However, there's a remarkable amount of degradation (in my experience which is notably limited) in the rest of the running gear. When kept idle, I've found that they seem to rust fairly quickly where there is metal - like the running gear. Oh, the body is fine. The frame, where exposed, rusted as did the various underpinnings.
I should note that my experience is limited. However, the few that I've looked into (that were not kept as well as they should be) have all suffered more so than I'd expect - given the duration and levels of exposure. I've only looked into a few in that condition and only one of them was looked at in great detail.
The car was a collection of mostly good ideas, done horribly wrong, and it shows in the numbers. They're anemic, handle like a lumbering giraffe, and are neither efficient or sporty. They are, on the other hand, shiny.
The thing is, with the way the car was designed, they should have (could have) been so much better. I'd love to see one with a less mushy suspension, a beefy engine married to a nice manual transmission, and more robust braking, steering components, and better matched tires. The cars really could have been awesome. Ugly, but awesome. The idea of the stainless is fantastic. The use of fiberglass on the underbody was genius. The interior could have been fantastic.
But no... Heh... Let's hope you don't need to roll the windows down or get in/out in a hurry. I've had friends who owned them and have driven them, I almost rescued one but it was too far gone. They're rather unique but, as it turned out, they have just the redeeming quality of aesthetics and those are entirely subjective. I find them ugly enough to be neat and, as I said, I'd almost rescued one but did not. The engine was seized and I was unable to get it to turn over. If I could have just done that, and not much else, then I'd have rescued it - even at the stupidly high price, just to make sure that it was kept alive. Alas, things did not turn out well and I imagine it's still in situ, in a farmer's field, outside of Winston-Salem, NC.
They really could have been such great cars. They had such great potential. The ideas that went into it were groundbreaking. Somehow, it ended up being pretty much the exact opposite of what it should/could have been. Add to that the financial problems (a given, considering the actual results of those ideas) and the way the owner attempted to rectify those financial issues and you get a huge disappointment - something I've been disappointed in for a long time.
I've made it a point, however, to be fairly polite in my response. You appear to be quite a fan and a knowledgeable one. I can understand, accept, and sympathize. I'm guessing you own one or more? In my experience, the fans are rather dedicated. It's not unusual to find people who own one and a half or have one that is "nearly complete" tucked away in storage as well as a second one that's much less complete. They do seem to be a dedicated group and that, in and of itself, is awesome.
The car really should have been so much more than what it was. I seem to recall a documentary (or a part of one) that went into the car and there was quite a bit of fuckery that were involved at nearly all stages of the process. DMC really didn't have a whole lot of chances for success, for lots of reasons, and the resulting creation is less than impressive in my humble opinion. It's sadly so - I'd have loved for it to be everything it could have been, a success, and the company still in business today. What is great is that there's an awesome, dedicated, fan-base who keep them alive. I've encountered a few, however, who were a bit more passionate than might be justified and they were a bit too biased to accept the failings, blemishes, or faults. If nothing else, they're passionate.
I don't know where you stand on the line so I'll treat lightly - and be respectful. ;-) The thing is, I
I think you're not giving it full potential. Getting him out to see might allow for, shall we say, certain "disposal" methods that are a bit infamous. Looked at with certain light, you just have to imagine that they're disposing something instead of retrieving something, no? This might actually solve some problems. Which problems those are, specifically, is an exercise for the reader's imagination.
I'm not sure why but your country went from post-WWII all the way to Thatcher with good speed. You've hit a bit of a rough patch in the past 30 years.
As an aside, I made a post last night that responded to someone who was suggesting that "fiscal conservatives" (US politics) should be joining with the Libertarian party because the Republicans were no longer fiscal conservatives. I've left it open for them to reply, before writing my novella, but I do have said novella mentally prepared. If presented with the opportunity, I may take one of several tacks. I'll likely go with helpful, polite, and educational. But it'd be sorely tempting to go another route. It's as if people have chosen to ignore the "liberty" aspect of the title and simply assumed that anyone who is fiscally conservative (regardless of reason) is a good fit for the party, belongs in the party, and that such is actually a primary motive of the entirety of the party.
Ah well... I'll have to see where it goes and if I'm given the invitation to continue. I actually skipped typing out the novella by default and, instead, asked if they were interested in having more information. I know, I know... I was tired.
I believe they've just made new molds for some of it. They're not made using the same techniques but the end results are similar enough that it doesn't' matter to people, I guess. I am a rather dedicated automobile aficionado but, I gotta be honest here, these cars don't really have much going for them other than the outward appearances.
At any rate, I'm nearly positive that I've read that (at considerable expense) they're able to make much (all?) the molding. I seem to recall that there was a bit of an ado about both it and, in particular, a bit of a row that needed licensing specifically about knobs and some markings on the recreations? I believe that this was due, in part or in whole, to them being trademarked and the company not having the license and some dispute about the license ownership and transfer of rights - did they have the rights to authorize recreations and things of that nature.
I want to say that it was in Jalopnik but it might have been in dead-tree form in Automobile or Road & Track. Alas, I still subscribe to quite a few dead-tree publications. I believe that my dead-tree subscription makes me eligible for electronic versions? I've never really enjoyed those and, perhaps worse, I've not actually tried to make use of the electronic versions in a lot of years. Even though I don't really like a tablet, they do make "good enough" consumption devices and I might even enjoy the electronic versions on a tablet if I tried them.
I should probably do that.
As I noted above - other than a stainless body that was heavy and made for shitty handling characteristics, they were anemic, unreliable, costly, and had no redeeming qualities other than the design - and that's VERY depending on taste. I almost (as mentioned above) bought a used one from the middle of a field but there was no way that I was going to do so given the condition it was in. I spent a few weekends getting my hands dirty and working to get it running but it was to no avail.
I haven't looked at the new ones but the old ones were rather anemic. They came with a fairly wimpy 6 in them and were actually really low-powered. Absurdly so... They were poor mechanically, they were underpowered, they had the fit and finish one would expect from an 80s American car, they had poor handling characteristics, they had no redeeming qualities OTHER than their look.
That said, I almost bought one at one time. The engine was seized, the running gear a bit rusty (but not the body), and would have modified the hell out of it - had I been able to get to turn over and out of the field on its own power - that was the agreement I'd made with the owner. I put a full three weekends into it, I couldn't get the engine to turn over, and trying to pull on it would probably have racked the car. It was mired in what had been mud and had been left there, stuck, for years by his son. The engine seized during this time and so I never bought it.
It simply wasn't worth the amount they were asking for it. They thought it was worth a fortune - in the late 1990s, early 2000s. Somewhere, outside of Winston-Salem, there's probably still a farm where you can see a DeLorean in the back field. Even now that I have a few more dollars than I had then, I'd still not buy it. There is actually a collector's market for them but my collection is not predicated on a market. Any vehicles that happen to have a collectible value is purely chance. I own a lot of vehicles and each one is because I like it and have a purpose (sometimes vague or horribly wrong) for it. One of my happiest pieces is a fully restored Accord LX from 1988. Yes, it's every bit as awesome as one might think. However, it's hardly a collector's car though there is a bit of a dedicated market for them.
Shit! You're on to me.
No, really... Sort of... I'm a secular Buddhist and sure as hell not a monk. But, I can certainly look like one. I do actually own a few sets of monk's robes (kasaya - I think that's spelled properly). I also travel. I like to travel a lot and sometimes I go places that I probably should not go. Wearing the kasaya has lots and lots of benefits - people are genuinely happy to see you pass by, if I don't want to talk to someone I can just point at my lips and smile and shake my head, and nobody every (normally) harms a monk - they might be a bad ass at kung-fu! I am not a bad ass at kung-fu, I suspect if I tried to look like so then I'd feel both stupid and look stupid(er). I did take all available levels of MCT, so I guess some folks might think I'm a bad ass but, really, I'm mostly a dawdling old man these days. I'm quite harmless, I assure you.
Heh... So, yeah - I think I've mentioned it before here but probably not too often. I don't want other people to figure it out. I did buy the robes when I went on refuge and I really am a Buddhist - I'm just not a very good Buddhist, I'm a secular Buddhist, and I'm sure as hell not a monk. It was then that I noticed, when traveling around afterwards, that everybody changed how they respond to you if you're wearing your robes (I'm pretty sure they're spelled something like kasaya). I do not have them with me on my current travels.
Shh! Don't tell anyone. They'll all start doing it, it will look like there are millions of monks traveling, and eventually someone will figure it out. If everyone did it, it would ruin it. Also, sometimes you're mistaken for a Krishna. That's generally okay too. Krishna practitioners have been pretty cool people, the ones that I've met, and I've enjoyed talking with them and have learned a little about their beliefs. I even learned one of their prayers. Err... It's not exactly hard. "Hare Krishna Hare Krishna Krishna Krishna Hare Hare Hare Rama Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare." I think that's the right order...