Not saying it is not garbage journalism, but there is an unidentified guy with a fortune estimated to 1.8 trillion dollar. Much more if bitcoin takes over, up to 5% total Earth Wealth in the unlikely scenario of bitcoin becoming the world currency. I wonder why there is not much more article trying to track him down considering we live in a world that has a fetish for famous people.

Considering that bitcoin by design keep the log of all transaction. Once your ID is linked to a wallet anybody will be able to know whatever you did with your money. Obviously not a big problem to workaround but the risk is a lot higher than with cash transaction.

The vast majority of the software use would not be able to read the source at all.

What they can do is asked other people that can if the software is ok or not. At that stage it does not matter if the code is open source or not. If the community, like malware listing site or others, has vetted the software, it is as good guarantee as they will ever have. Having the source code just make our job easier when trying to help guys with problem.

Well there is a maximum of 21 million bitcoin. If the currency become successful, that 21 million will represent the total wealth of the whole planet. If it does not who knows.

It is not only the price but also the fact that there is no longer a pile of bag available. You need to ask for the right amount of bags, and it gets recorded on your receipt. Cashier will also very often forget to even ask you the question so you end up with your stuff pilling and no bag to pack them until you get the attention of the cashier.

It is all the little annoyance combined that make it work. It seems to work much less in Marc and Spenser Food Only where somebody is packing your stuff for you.

Dude, you asked for the sales figures, the best I had without telling you to go google it yourself.

I added the total sale just because it is interesting to keep things in perspective, especially on /. where people have a tendency to think the most difficult thing in selling cars is choosing the javascript framework for the website. It got you though, "Tesla just need to find a way to cut the price in half and they will sell 2 million cars a years." which is the physical world equivalent of "if they just made Windows opensource, the Linux kernel team will be able to remove all the bugs in no time"

Anyway, the point of the thread is not if electric is good or not, considering that this is /. and you do not really need to sell the idea of electric cars. The question was why is there only 45K electric cars sold in 2013 and not more. The answer seems to be either they are expensive (Tesla) or their range sucks (all others).

According to Tesla, their expected production capacity was 20,000 cars per year. 580,258 cars were sold in the US ... in October 2013 alone.

It is interesting to note that in France it was to other way around. Independent could not compete with Amazon because book price is fixed by law. The "protection" is closing a loophole that allow shop like Amazon and other to offer a discount price and free delivery on top.

France has done nothing to protect the bookstores from the e-book.

Tesla has a lot more surface with batteries so the risk is likely higher. With only few reports it is difficult to say, but apparently the batteries of the Tesla seem to take fire more easily than a regular tank. On the other hand, gazoline cars, when on fire, behave worse than the Tesla.

In any case, worth investigating. Tesla is a unique design, it is bound to have various design issues and that's really no big deal at this stage. After all, that's a high end car, and all high end cars have their own quirks. The stock taking a tumble is quite welcome too. Right now Tesla is valued as if it was ready to take over the world in the next 6 months.

They don't do that - they wait until you have had a crash to then refuse to cover you. In the meanwhile they are happy to milk you for more.

It is sad what Agile has become since becoming mainstrean. It used to be a way to give back the requirement BACK to the domain expert instead of either the developer (bad) or some unrelated department (worse).

It used to give the planning and estimation back to the people actually doing the work, the developer. Now I see job offers for "Project Manager (Scrum Master)" to run an agile team. Sad, very sad.

The "control everything" (or in a positive light "integration"), is what Apple is selling and what they are good at. Apple cannot compete head to head with Android, history taught them that - they failed until Jobs came back and started to focus on their niche. After a decade of restructuring, Apple is simply not ready to compete on many fronts, like Samsung is for example.

That is what is amazing with Apple this time. They had the whole smartphone market by the balls, but they let it go to stay focused on a smaller number of products.

The real big big difference is that this time there are other players competing in Apple's traditional niche instead of being left alone. If Apple eventually fails, it is this time not because of a strategic problem, just because the competition was good. ( and that's a good thing no ? )

And they say the government can do nothing right.

Yeah, well. I work on the sort of application that require lot of customisation on top of a core product. Our sales generally "wow" the client and get them to sign by showing the UI. One of the first client customisation though, is hooking to their system so that they don't have to use our UI.

In some cases, it is all about checkboxes. With large companies you sell your software to one strategic group but that's a totally separate operational group that get to use the software.

So sure those companies should go under for such inefficiencies, but apparently they post billion dollar profit every quarter and received government bailouts the one year they failed.

As someone going through the process right now. Most of the talk is balanced in the same way that teaching intelligent design together with evolution is teaching a balanced view on current "evolution theories". In NHS view, everything is good and giving good result, that's purely your choice. At most they will recommend something like "Vitamin K" to the baby at birth, or give you statistic like 90% of women have a peridurale, but otherwise, it is up to you to document yourself or ask precise questions because balanced means all option will have equal talk time focused entirely on the positive aspect of it or mandatory disclaimer of objective nature only (i.e. never "it can hurt", but stuff like "it can affect your bladder in that fashion")

For example, they will tell you how great Home Birth is and how great the birthcenter at the hospital is, but they will not check if your specific Home is actually superior or not to Hospital Birth. That's up to you to do the assessment yourself. based on what you read on the internet, not what they tell you. They will talk to you about all the mandatory problem that could happen with epidural, they will not tell you to do anything but will conclude with "women with epidural do great, but so do women without epidural". They will also share personal experience of women going through labour with a few paracetamols just in case they thought they pushed you toward epidural too much. Again you need to make up your mind based on the information that is available to you, not on what they tell you.

BTW, we had a midwife recommending us to take document ourself before chosing for our kid to have the MMR vaccine because there are pro and con and the risk is to get one of MMR is actually very small. She didn't say the risk is small because of all the others that get vaccinated. (disclaimer: that midwife was an all natural as god intended type of person. So most likely her view were different than the NHS view. Still, she was allowed to express this balanced view of things)