Yes and no. Many of the garages in USA only have 120 V/15 A. That is not enough to charge a real electric car.
What is needed is a MINIMUM of 240V/30 A, if not 50A. That way, the cars can fully charge in the middle of the night all over.

"The wars of the future will not be fought on the battlefield or at sea. They will be fought in space, or possibly on top of a very tall mountain. In either case, most of the actual fighting will be done by small robots. And as you go forth today remember always your duty is clear: To build and maintain those robots."

which is why America is socialist, and the fact that most of this was found in Russia and the middle east. I mean that later would have nothing to do with going after terrorists, would it?

How about records of one or more government agencies intruding into other government agency's or branch's networks?

For instance, could there be evidence contained in those logs of TLAs intruding into the networks of Congress, the SCOTUS, etc?

Never mind TLAs spying on normal everyday citizens. The Executive Branch has been quite cavalier of late in spying on those in the other branches of government, particularly when said other branches may be deciding whether or not to exercise their duty and ability to limit the Executive Branch's power and scope.

This data could provide hard evidence regarding just how extensive and pervasive these practices have become.

Strat

I see an AC that posted pointing fingers, but this still does not have any fingers on it. All that it has is snowden making claims, but with zero proof behind it.

So many ppl come here and post that Windows is not only safe, but that it is targeted because of numbers. Yet, it is obvious that NSA and GCHQ targeted Windows. Why? I doubt that it was numbers, but ease of cracking.

So, in the meantime, how many companies will start switching to *nix?

To charge lonely men money for the privilege of sending "flowers" or "notes" to women that cost nothing to create in the database.

makes price comparisons hard.

Right. Sums it up. Online or otherwise, two local stores or otherwise.

You can check things like technology, spring count, spring gauge, coil counts, meterials, dimensions, etc but at the end of the day your right... you still just don't know if what you are getting online is the same as the bed your lay on at the store.

And even if the specs seem to line up, it may or may not be the same thing.The building materials (fabric quality), general construction / craftsmanship, and QA still may not be the same. Whether you care or not is a separate question.

It may be just as comfortable and just as good in every way. Or the online version may have cheaped out some other place you didn't think to look, perhaps they skipped a QA step so you may or may not get a good unit, or even worse... maybe your getting the stuff that didn't quite meet the store brand's standards. So they slap a different model number and off-name brand badge on it and unload it somewhere else.

I used to recall it said that generic film and fuji film were made in the same plant and were the same thing. Technically they were or at least could be the same some of the time. But the QA and acceptance standards on the stuff that got sent out with the fuji brand conformed to markedly higher standards.

So upshot was the off brand stuff was just as good, except when it wasn't.

So online pricing being lower vs shops is not completely a scam, nor is it 'just mattresses'... nearly all furniture is like this.

An assertion 'Whether people "may" not want to own them' as a logical argument is all but meaningless. If even a handful of people on the face of the earth sees a self driving car and decides based on that not to own one, then the proposition is true. But that is CLEARLY not the argument the author is making. He is arguing with respect to a much much larger class of people.

The presumed argument per the slashdot article is that given self driving cars then as a society was are going to largely move away from owning them. Not everyone, of course, but a large number of us, precisely because they are self driving.

"Whether people "may" not want to own them has no bearing on whether you would."

Quite. But 'whether or not *I* would own a car' was just an introduction to the argument, introducing the very large class of people, for whom, like myself, self-driving cars is simply neither here nor there in the decision to own one.

You probably just take a several-billion-year nap.

The energy will have to come from elsewhere, then.

You're comparing apples and orange marmalade. The question is whether electricity is more easily managed than hydrogen, and with modern battery compositions, the answer is yes. Hydrogen is a PITA to manage. These days, batteries are fairly unlikely to burst into flames just sitting around, so the days when they were a big problem are over, unless you're Fisker.

Brief moments aside, America has long been so rich that we had excess cars lying about. Now we are so poor that we have excess cars lying about which nobody can afford to buy. They stack up at ports and rot there. Anyway, point is, reliability was not the primary concern for American buyers until recently, the two things that gave the Japanese a leg up were the energy crisis and emissions regulations. The American car companies just punted on emissions technology for years and churned out not just unreliable cars, but unreliable slow cars. Datsun and later Nissan was able to beat cars that were just as fast as Corvettes for half the money and with half the displacement (1971 240Z, 1984 300ZX Turbo, 1991 300ZX TT) during that era because it was competing with ultra-low-compression V8s with big crappy carburetors. And of course, when we first decided we cared about mileage, the Japanese were right there with double the numbers of the American companies.

Reliability is a factor, but the truth is that the American cars of the era when the Japanese got a leg up were just shit in every way. Today they're often actually quite good, surprisingly including and maybe even especially Ford.

Can you explain to us how the accounting is done? If I buy a part 20 years on for a vehicle for which I'm not even the first owner, and it's a part which can fit 20 different vehicles, how do you account for the profit? You don't have accurate statistics on failures on vehicles that old, because people don't bring them back to the dealer for service. From my various forays into automotive parts replacement and part ordering, I know that without exception the manufacturers charge absolutely abusive prices for replacement parts. You're telling me that having more expensive parts doesn't lead to more profit? Go on, pull the other one.

Automakers derive significant profit from parts sales, and EVs both have less parts and are less prone to failure than vehicles with ICEs. Auto dealers also derive significant profit from service, so they don't want to sell EVs. They won't need as much service, and most of what they need will be stuff that can be done by anyone. There's no good reason to go back to the dealer for it.

We've been driving production hybrids for fifteen years now. We already know the best way to do it, you replace the torque converter of an automatic transmission with an electric motor. In spite of that, people are still doing it in other ways which cost more money, and which increase parts count.

And if the only problem remaining to you in life is boredom?

Get it going fast enough and it would look somewhat like a gamma ray burst, to those directly ahead of it, and be invisible from most directions. But there's probably not enough energy in a star to get it up to that sort of speed, at least with any sort of "stellar engine" anyone has yet imagined.

Bury a bunch of beacon power flywheels and top it with a generac natgas fuel cell

Or other brands, I just know these guys have stuff