True story. A recall like this will NEVER be bad publicity when it's made as soon as the manufacturer realizes a problem exists and before anyone in the field has even seen anything. I've wanted a Tesla for awhile now, and if my current car can make it long enough, my next new car is going to be a Model 3... exactly BECAUSE of recalls like this. Tesla not only makes the safest cars on the road, but they have the safest organization as well. Clearly their management is more interested in making a safe car than turning a quick buck, and that's the kind of company that I want to do business with.

The story I read said that there were unconfirmed whispers that it was 18nm. It still IS impressive, like you said, but that 10nm-CLASS shit is so misleading. Just tell it like it is, it's already impressive enough.

I started reading the story wanting to hate him and disagree with him, and while I still dislike him, he's right. A lot of traders and companies and agencies are getting away with murder because the regulations are vague, and they use that to their advantage, keeping others out by interpreting regulations one way for some people, and raking in the dough by interpreting them more favorably for themselves and their friends. The SEC DOES 100% need to tighten up their regulations and enforcement. Someone brought up the FDA regulations, and while there is still some level of regulatory capture, etc with the FDA, it is nowhere NEAR as bad as the SEC. SEC emulation of FDA regulation sounds like a good thing to me. Now, I feel like this is not what Cuban is meaning to say, but it's completely in line with what he did say, so he can suck it.

And honestly, I don't want this. I have unlimited data already, and I would prefer to watch in HD, or at least at 720p at the very least. I don't want to watch stuff at 480 again. The fact that this can force me to watch in lower def (at least according to reports from when this was announced, don't actually know if it's true) pisses me off more than anything, and that would still be true even if I didn't have unlimited data.

This same argument was debunked right after the attacks. Repeating it again and again doesn't make it true. Here's a link to a post that lays out several of the totally incorrect conclusions that they've been pushing: http://www.washingtonsblog.com...
(It also includes debunking some points unrelated to encryption and mass surveillance that can be ignored in respect to this specific article.)

That's actually a good idea, cause the batteries size could be changed based on the trailer and maximum load sizes. It could also allow for motors to be placed on some of the rear axles, which I could see possibly being useful.

I'm not sure about that. The range for long range hauling semis might not be there, but there's a ton of semis that get used in limited geographic areas. Lots of places have a central depot or two in a city, that services all their stores/outlets/etc. Many of those semis don't really need huge range, they're just bigger moving/freight trucks. Heck, if you designed it right you could include easily swap-able battery packs with quick charge capability. The truck comes back to the depot, as it's getting refilled or getting a new trailer, the battery pack gets swapped for a new one, and bam, away you go, while your other battery pack charges up again for your next go round. Hell... I don't know why you couldn't do the same type of thing with large highway truck stops, which could certainly make long haul electric trucking a reality. And with the amount of gas that gets spent on these trucks, even with the high cost of batteries there's probably a substantial savings to be had.

I'm going to be honest... I have no problem with someone doing that that is really working to advance and better the human race. Most people like that like to talk about how amazing they are, or to brag about how great something they've done is. I don't really see or hear about Musk acting like that. He's always looking for the next project and trying something new. Some of the new projects he talks about are flat out ridiculous. Some of them seem ridiculous, but are actually far more doable than anyone is willing to admit until he goes and does them. Some of them are just pretty run of the mill improvements. So if Musk wants to stay in the public eye by talking about wild shit, I've got less than no problem with it as long as he also keeps acting in the way he has in the past. The state of cars, space travel, and battery storage are all objectively better off for Musk's desire to stay in the public eye. If only every narcissist acted that way.

Aside from questions of longevity, I honestly much prefer the availability of light color options that LEDs provide. After getting several LEDs that are substantially cooler in color than normally available incandescents/CFLs, I never want to go back. Add to that the fact that I can GET warmer colored LEDs if I desire, and the fact that I can use LED lights that package other abilities into their package (like wireless speakers), and I just don't see the consumer draw other than some rose colored glasses. (Maybe for dimmable bulbs, which I know LEDs struggled with for awhile but they seem to have overcome that also... This also ignores the brightness of the lightbulb, as LEDs have just generally been brighter [a good thing imo] than comparable incandescents and CFLs in my experience. Maybe the new tech solves that, but still probably not worth it as a consumer is my feeling.)

I would argue that in the agile world, it matters just as much if not more, especially with their desire to charge a flat fee. From the article: " A sales engineer discusses proposals with clients, and using the AI engine, comes back with a price quote and production schedule in about 10 minutes. Then Gigster manages the entire development process through delivery of the fully-functional app." This implies to me that they are coming up with this fee and the full schedule at the start, from someone who isn't going to be that closely invested in the actual development of the app (and who likely is going to miss a LOT of what's going to go in that development. I know some very good sales engineers, but they are almost all behind the development curve just due to the fact that they don't DO development regularly, if at all.) That's not agile. That's the antithesis of agile. The entire point of agile is that you can't know right from the start how exactly a project is going to turn out, and what kinds of roadblocks you'll encounter. And especially with the development of original apps, unexpected events are going to crop up. The agile method is built to zero in on requirements during the process of development, and to actually allow an estimate to be just that, an estimate of time and cost. And yes yes, I know that agile can't be completely open ended, but the entire point is to be flexible in your development so you can easily adjust when problems arise, which, again, is NOT what this company seems to be doing. This company is not doing that at all, they're like the epitome of waterfall style development. Which means they have to be nearly perfect at requirements and estimating, which is nearly impossible. And I think you're right that it will almost certainly come back and bite them in the ass. (And that's ignoring the bullshit sharing economy/labor issues involved.)

For the first point, I see what you're saying and agree, but at the same time, it sounds like it's not actually going to be a 'star' based system (which is why I was saying 'star equivalent), and I think that gives them the ability rate older models in the new system alongside newer models, without the confusion, since the rating system isn't going to be just the one measurement, if that makes sense. For the second part, I think it's totally fair. I mean, if Tesla is the only company that has put in the work to make their car that safe, right out of the gate, then that's how it it. Tesla, as far as I know, hasn't been doing anything that any other high end car manufacturer couldn't do if they had prioritized it. If they designed their car so that it's already so far ahead of the pack that even under stringent new standards it STILL performs amazingly, I think that's great. AND it provides a very hard incentive to other companies. Unlike with the newer MPG regulations, they won't be able to whine about something being impossible... because it's clearly already been done. Personally, I actually kind of like that even better. :D

Thank you. The summary was pretty biased. I've never been a fan one way or the other, I mainly just try to get the best processors and video cards that I can with the money that I have. I've had AMD machines and ATI cards plenty in the past, and I still feel they deliver good low end chips and solutions. But with the introduction of the Core 2 Duo, Intel really started to shape up, and lately they've been blowing it out of the ballpark (for the most part). AMD, on the other hand... hasn't been. Now, yes, Intel screwed over AMD in the early 2000s. But AMD has had PLENTY of opportunity to not only come back from that, but to turn out seriously competitive hardware, and they've almost always failed to do so. Don't get me wrong, they have had real winners here and there, and they still do turn out good parts for a person on a budget. But they just keep falling down when they move outside of that area. And since I have enough money now that I don't need to buy low end systems, I just... don't buy AMD.

Sounds good to me. Part of the point (maybe the biggest part) of these evaluations is so that consumers are equipped to make good, educated decisions when it comes to the cars they purchase. Another is to provide incentive to car manufacturers to actually improve tech. That means evolving standards to always get better. It's very similar to the fleet MPG standards... the best outcome is complete protection for passengers and pedestrians. We know that's not possible, but we know we can do better than we are, so we can evolve our standards to always be improving the status quo. At some point you do hit diminishing returns, but I don't think we're even close to there yet. Imo, they should rank a current average '4' at the equivalent of a 2 in the new scale, and then make the equivalent of a 5 basically impossible to get now, but attainable in 5-10 years with heavy focus on the development of safety systems. And in 15~20 years when most cars are again getting towards the top of the scale... reset again.

*One or two. Maybe I should start using that preview instead of ignoring it and going straight to posting...

One of the issues that I've been running into for a long while, and expect to be running into even more with the expansion of the M.2 and related slots, has been the serious lack of PCI-E lanes that Intel supports. It's very easy, running SLI and one of two other things that use PCI-E, to run out of PCI-E lanes on today's boards, especially if you're a power user. And with new expansion slots for SSDs and other applications starting to enter the market, using multiple PCI-E lanes (up to 4 for a single M.2 slot), it's going to be even easier to suck all those lanes up and still need more. Honestly, for some power users, Intel could probably double the number of PCI-E lanes natively supported, and still not provide enough.