RTFA (or the summary.)

Those items are already expected to be stowed.

The electronic device rule implies that you do not have to stow the devices, hence their objection.

Those items are already expected to be stowed.

The electronic device rule implies that you do not have to stow the devices, hence their objection.

I do high performance driver education events, and you're required to empty the car of everything not bolted down to it - everything comes out and goes into a box that you leave in the pits. Video cameras have to be tethered (because tripod mounts in traditional video camcorders are designed to break off if they're stressed too much.)

Anything not bolted down can become a projectile.

Lot of people don't think about this with their cars, but at least then, you're by and large only placing yourself, and a limited number of passengers who chose to ride with you, at risk.

Pay no attention to the fact that what they're really doing is strongly diluting the actual poor reviews.

Honestly, the FAQ on their website makes them sound like complete fucking assholes. You don't have to bend over backwards for customers, but you really don't need to go around insulting the hell out of them.

Do tell. Enron, maybe?

That's weird. The very article you link says most of it is written in C/C++, with a bunch of other stuff thrown in here and there. One guy said he used Visual Basic.

There aren't "stories every day" about Tesla, but every time there's a Tesla story, there is someone bitching and moaning about "all" the Tesla stories.

There have been 30 stories since January 1st - that equals about one story every 8.5 days.

You can count yourself, if you like. They do get clustered a bit, probably because when one piece of Tesla news hits, everyone starts paying more attention to Tesla related topics.

http://slashdot.org/tag/tesla

More the fool, they.

There's a problem and they're handling it immediately and responsibly,

Uh, these drivetrain failures have been happening for at least a year. Google around and you'll see reports of failures around early 2013.

Edmund's Tesla has had the drive unit replaced FOUR times since they bought it last year.

http://insideevs.com/edmunds-long-term-tesla-model-s-on-fourth-drive-unit-going-up-for-sale/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cable_landing_point

(for example. There are also some cool youtube videos on this subject, I believe.)

It's actual photonic capacitance causing the induced charge within the lining

I doubt this is anywhere near as significant as the 3000-4000VDC electricity for the repeater modules along the cable.

Your comment about "pushing it to a platform like Github where it typically sits and rusts" is telling. What do you think will really change if you just shift when you push your code to Github?

In a nutshell, "if you build it, they will come" is a nice fantasy, nothing more.

Even very high-profile open source projects often have very few contributors outside of the companies that first created them.

And I don't think the problem is that these projects don't get community developers on board soon enough. Why would a hobbyist or other unpaid developer risk devoting time and resources to a project that is mostly vaporware?

The problem is that it's very difficult to get unaffiliated developers to commit to working on something -- especially business software -- when there's no real incentive other than "someday this may end up being a product that your company might decide to evaluate to see if it might be possible to use instead of the commercial alternative that it has already sunk capital into and has been using for the last five years."

Cost is not the only consideration. It also by and large doesn't matter - environmental damage does. And build time.

Nuclear power plants can only be built so fast...I believe the chief restriction at the moment is how fast the containment vessels can be manufactured, and there's already a backlog.

What's frustrating is that we're pouring billions into fusion research with virtually no evidence of payout, instead of going with the solutions we have today, and then working on fusion once we've stopped fucking over the planet quite so quickly.

Haruko Obokata was the lead researcher on those, and also the person responsible for fabricating the research results. Sure, his name was on it as a co-author, but that sounds more like the result of office politics than actually believing what she was publishing.

"Who's listed as author and in what order" is full of politics and bargaining. It's extremely common for first author to be a PI (faculty member or head of a group/lab) simply because the research happened in their lab and the actual primary researcher did most/all of the work.

Sometimes one researcher gets "scooped" and in exchange for providing help/data, gets authorship on someone else's paper as a sort of last-ditch attempt to get something out of their work.

Especially in a country like Japan where suicide is a huge problem, the note's contents will never be released.

Reporting on suicide has serious ethical consequences, and revealing the contents of the note means others will see suicide as a valid way to bring their ideas, grievances, or innocence to public light.

In most cases suicides are not reported, and even if they are newsworthy, generally the suicide nature is downplayed as much as possible.

It's one of those really sucky problems that's hard to deal with. Few really realize how much of a problem it is, but bringing awareness often makes it worse. One of the many things insidious about mental illness.