Link to Original Source
This won't happen until electric cars with Model S-like capabilities cost $20,000 - $35,000. The Volt and its various competitors don't really count as Model S equivalents, and few would compare them directly. While it's true that you can save a huge amount on gas compared to electricity if you drive a great deal, that's money people are used to budgeting per month and it's not typically enough to compare to the up-front price of the car.
Now, if Elon and Co intended to deliver a Model S at even $35,000 in the next year or two, than I might agree with this claim. Until that happens, I don't see electric cars cresting some enormous tipping point.
"The point is that we don't want anyone to _have_ to use DRM. Making it available is one more step in that direction.
DRM is not a capability in the traditional sense. It's not a way for your software to do something. It's a way to prevent the user from using the software as they please, as directed by the content provider. That's a restriction, not a capability."
I would also prefer not to have to use DRM. Unfortunately, DRM exists and prevents me from watching the content I want to watch. Therefore, I will use DRM. Why? Because I'd rather pay $8 for an honest license than pirate for the rest of my life. Because streaming to multiple devices is simpler than managing a central file repository of content.
I'm glad Firefox w/o DRM exists. I'm glad other browser forks exist. I choose to use the version with this capability embedded because it *serves my needs.* If you want to take that away from me, then you aren't promoting any kind of live-and-let-live philosophy -- you've flipped over into a position every bit as tyrannical as the one the copyright industry holds. You want me to abandon content consumption for principle. You would sooner there was no legal content than allow legal consumption w/ DRM attached.
You're absolutely allowed to feel and think and advocate for such positions, but you don't get to tell everybody who thinks differently that they don't count.
You don't get 72 vaccines.
You get 49 doses of 14 vaccines by 6 and 69 doses by 18 if you follow the recommended schedule.
Part of the reason we do the vaccines this way is because we now know more about the immune system and how effective the shots are / how long they last.
Part of the reason we do the vaccines this way is because the less-toxic versions that have been developed since the 1960s are also less effective and must be administered more often.
Part of the reason we do the vaccines this way is because its the best way to give immunity for life. After six, you shouldn't need a booster for polio, measles, varicella, or several others.
Either way, nobody gets 72 vaccinations.
What the gods would destroy they first submit to an IEEE standards committee.