I just bought a Ford C-Max Energi; but I bought it strictly for the green carpool-lane sticker.

In California, if you live in a big house, your marginal cost of electricity is shockingly high. For me, it's $0.33/kilowatt-hour.

My Energi goes 20 miles with a 8 kWh charge. That's $2.64 On gas, it gets about 35 mpg. If gas is $3.50 (current price) that's $2.20.

Now, during mid-day on a sunny day, I can charge it much cheaper on our solar panels (currently we are selling power back to PG&E, but at $0.11/kWh) and I do that. I also charge it at work, where it's 'free'; but I live 50 miles from work so I can't keep the car charged just at work. The 'free' power at work won't last forever, either.

You may ask "why not get a Tesla?" Good question. It turns out that there are (at my company) 3x the number of electric-ish cars as there are charging stations, so we have to swap them out after just a few hours. The Tesla would take all day to charge. Also, the Tesla is such a lumbering overpowered beast that it gets substantially less miles-per-kilowatt-hour.

Thad

No, t turns out most people don't want an EV to be FUNCTIONALLY DIFFERENT than the cars they know. Plugging it in every night is fine- until the night you forget, or the kids knock the plug out. Then you have no car the next day.

A car, for most people, is not something that you can realistically be only one day away from not having the use of, which there is some risk of with an EV, much greater at any rate than a normal car. That's why hybrids sell OK while real EV cars generally have not.

I'll put a side chiding in for super funky dash boards of some EV cars I've been in that are vastly too large for the space the car has.

Some time ago Elon Musk went on a rant about AI's destroying us.

AI's I do not fear, but C++ templates... there he might have something.

Somebody I know started taking antidepressants some time ago, and they helped the depression quite a bit. One curious thing, though, is that once she is taking them, she assumes that I can read her mind; that I obviously know what she is thinking. She stopped taking them for a while, and it was immediately apparent that she no longer felt that way, then when she started taking them again, it was back.

Today's software engineering world is so averse to training people it rarely considers searching for a veteran software engineer and letting him come up to speed on random techs.

Not to put too fine a point on it but that's your own responsibility, not the company you work for.

If there is an aversion to companies training people. that' offset by the ease of learning any newer (or even older) technology, for free.

If you wait for the company to help you, you (and your career) will ossify. I have seen the result when I was younger, the result is not good for your freedom to choose favorable working conditions.

How pithy. So explain the very quote from the article then complaining about housing pricing IN THE BAY AREA. It's obvious the scientists jobs are NOT IN SACRAMENTO or there would not be a problem, capiche?

Everyone in the midwest has been saying this to rent-is-too-damn-high whiners on both coasts for a long time now, and nobody listens.

I have a number of friends working in technical fields that live in the midwest (places like Ohio) that would strongly disagree with you...

There are many who do find healthier lifestyle choices compelling.

There are a fuckload of people living in the Bay Area on less than 107k/year.

Yes, and they are all living in the same apartment...

*Rimshot*

Hey everyone! Look at these small numbers over here! Ignore the fact that EVERY device has metadata logged so we can tell who you talked to, when... and possibly more but we'll not mention that.

If you work for the state, where do you HAVE to live in the bay area? Shouldn't the state alleviate the issue by having offices for these people in other, less expensive, areas of the state? You could attract a lot of people at a lower salary using quality of life as an attraction if you locate somewhere outside the major cities... there's a lot of California and all of it is not as expensive as the bay area.

If you think Iran's nuclear program has been costly for Iran, wait until you see what it costs the U.S.

I gave my reason originally; you just seemingly cannot comprehend it. That's on you.

If you want words to read because you lack simple common sense , read this

Since I am assured you'll learn nothing from that either, I leave the last response to you as it's not worth following up on helping you more than that.

Didn't stamp my feet. Pointed out they seemed to be, unreasonably. You just reenforce the point I made.

Which "new technologies" are they behind on exactly again?

Oh I forgot, they are so backwards in officially supporting ad-blockers going forward... hmm all of the sudden the whining about Safari makes so much more $ense now.

You web developers really don't understand where the market is going, do you?

I currently have a web radio transceiver front panel application that works on Linux, Windows, MacOS, Android, Amazon Kindle Fire, under Chrome, Firefox, or Opera. No porting, no software installation. See blog.algoram.com for details of what I'm writing.

The one unsupported popular platform? iOS, because Safari doesn't have the function used to acquire the microphone in the web audio API (and perhaps doesn't have other parts of that API), and Apple insists on handicapping other browsers by forcing them to use Apple's rendering engine.

I don't have any answer other than "don't buy iOS until they fix it".

When you can figure out the reason that no other technical standard is decided at paid conferences, you'll have your answer.

Or you could have it way sooner, but then you didn't choose that option.