They've never before been successful at jumping into a new category and making hundreds of billions of dollars. You are right to bet against them.

I guess they must all be wrong.

Welcome to the future.

Is it because you love your ICE car so much and you need to rationalize its continued use? Is it because you hate people who like electric cars because their politics are different than yours? Why are you so desperate to believe something that is so obviously silly?

Incontrovertible facts:

1. Electric cars are 3x as efficient as gas cars. 100mpge+ is common for electric cars.
2. The grid is dirtier is some places than in others, but it gets greener everywhere over time (through the introduction of renewable energy sources and improved efficiencies & scrubbers located at energy plants). So, the installed base of electric cars immediately become *greener* each year while ICE cars only become greener when the car is replaced--and it is *much* cheaper to make grid power cleaner than ICE cars.

With these two facts in hand any sane person would be very skeptical of claims about ICE cars being greener than electric cars--VERY skeptical.

Your link is pointing out that the grid is currently pretty dirty in some places in the world--and then you say that in 80% of the world it doesn't reduce carbon footprint to buy an electric car.

For one, it doesn't matter where all the people live, it matters where all the miles are driven--and there are about 3x as many miles driven per year in the US than in all of Asia, despite Asia having 10x as many people: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=us+auto+miles+driven+per+year+vs.+asia+auto+miles+driven+per+year

Secondly, as I said earlier: the grid gets cleaner every year and it is *much* cheaper to improve the carbon footprint of a handful of power plants than in a couple billion individual ICE cars.

just like we don't have multiple parallel sewage systems or electrical power distribution networks. There are multiple different restaurants--see the difference?

Problem solved.

What makes you think otherwise? If the network is effectively a monopoly then the government has every right to regulate it.

It's absurd for everyone to have parallel high-speed links into their homes to enable competition, just as it would be absurd to have multiple parallel sewage or electrical networks. Instead there should be a single last-mile network that is heavily regulated (including net neutrality) and then let the companies compete on everything else

http://www.apple.com

This is where a group of idiots declares that Apple doesn't invent anything, their employees only "integrate" technology invented elsewhere. As someone who (a) invents hardware technology for a living, and (b) doesn't work for Apple, I can tell you with absolute certainty that you are completely full of shit. Apple does a huge amount of hardware R & D.

It's a one-time pad-based system and the merchant never gets the real account number or even the user's name. They get a one-time code for a specific purchase amount at a specific time. You could intercept the RF transmission and publish it on a billboard in Times Square and it would still be unhackable.

My experience is that smug Apple-bashers are pretty ignorant about technology in general, thanks for reinforcing that opinion.

if you're using one-time pad encryption, which Apple Pay does.

Except for a thousand fucking companies.

Did you even read the question?

I've never seen a version control tool which is less intuitive for a new user than GIT. It has horrible support for binary blobs and documents. Windows support is an afterthought.

GIT is the right tool for you only inasmuch as your needs mirror those of Linux kernel developers. That covers some of the universe but not all of it and not any part of the universe represented by the original post question.

I'm done with this conversation. My conclusion is that you are mentally incapable of understanding why anyone pays more than $25K for a car to the point that you refuse to acknowledge that millions of people do.