Sure, that's what I was talking about when the story came up the first time. At least, I think it was the first time, you never really know around here. However, that's not really necessary, at least not in the first generation. Amazon can cover a significant percentage of the customers who would use a service like this simply by placing centers intelligently. Safeway still offers grocery delivery in counties where they only cover a tiny postage stamp of the total area if it will be profitable given the location of the store, and by the same token, Amazon may reasonably offer drone delivery only in subsets of certain regions.

False. According to that article, it is probably a publicity stunt, and some people have said that they think so, but there is no actual proof. They in fact do not unequivocally state that it is such in the article (though quoted sources say that they are sure that it is such) which I presume is why you didn't copy and paste anything where that actually happens, instead choosing to employ prevarication by calling attention to Amazon's odious business practices. I agree that they are odious, but that does not reflect upon the validity of the drone delivery model, nor Amazon's intent (or lack thereof) to employ it.

I think you're likely correct, but the linked article does not prove that you are, and it is therefore bullshit to continue pounding on it as if it contained the facts you're looking for. It doesn't. It contains speculation.

I'm pretty sure I do understand the logistics. Quadcopters are already capable of doing this job right now, the infrastructure needed is simply not there. The infrastructure required is broad in extent, but a straightforward and simple extension of existing systems already in place at Amazon, such as robots now performing picking jobs in some of their distribution centers.

Congratulations, you're an asshole! Your prize is getting to live with yourself!

I still just can't believe it's not butter.

Perhaps those trees are overwatered, and some others could use a little love.

Your link doesn't even prove that it was a publicity stunt, and here's why: its conclusions are based on false premises and it's full of fud. It's also clear why you didn't bother to link to the full article; it doesn't say what you want it to say either.

First FUD: "The practical issues are manifold". Yes, welcome to the real world. FUD, not a specific objection. The specific objections are then made, and they are stupid. "[...]how does it [the drone] then find the package's intended recipient?" Probably it homes in on the mobile device used to make the order, and you'll probably have to use one. How is the transfer of the package enacted? Depicted in the video. It knows where it's being delivered. What stops someone else stealing the package along the way? You mean, by shooting it down? Ah yes, this line item was expanded into two, for filler purposes. And what happens when next door's kid decides to shoot the drone with his BB rifle? The same thing as when next door's kid (the house has a child?) shoots anything else that doesn't belong to them. Except in this case, it's recorded by high-resolution camera.

Then we have an outright lie: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), which regulates this area, intends to make commercial drones legally viable and workable by 2015, but this deadline is all-but impossible No, no it isn't. It probably won't happen anyway due to lobbying from entrenched interests. But there's no reason why existing regulations can't be applied to commercial drones. The area below 500 feet is already available due to existing restrictions on civilian air traffic.

Meanwhile, Wired claims that Amazon's delivery model makes the drones unworkable, but that is just fucking stupid. It's stupid because Amazon has already changed their model partially to add more services, and there's no particular reason they can't do it again. Sort of like how Wired changed their magazine from having purple text on black backgrounds to having black text on neon green backgrounds to having black text on white backgrounds. Two changes, see? The drones won't be able to deliver everything in Amazon's catalog. It'll be small, high-value items often ordered by themselves by people willing to pay extra for rapid delivery.

In short, while it might well have been a hoax, nothing you have presented (nor any other evidence) proves it to be so.

As someone's tagline hereabouts says, "I don't have a problem with God; it's his cheerleaders I can't stand." :)

And technically, aren't the Ten Commandments a Hebrew/Jewish thing, not of Christian origin?

You don't need permanent magnets for that at all. You do need brushes or something else to let coils do the same job. Those go at the hub, where they can benefit from the reduced speeds.

A kid growing up in Detroit in the 90s would have had the opportunity to get a domestic car cheaply, since the auto workers could buy a car at cost every year back in the day. Growing up in California in the 90s, the supply of four bangers was more plentiful.

Citation needed. The paper does not in fact specify the feature size, but it does say it's related to wire size. I think it's much smaller than you think.

If you mean the fox body, they're awesome drag strip cars, but they're not good for much else. They were very light, though, for a vehicle with room for a 5-and-change lighter engine. Thing is, I can get an engine like that into a Japanese car, like a 240SX. Or into a 3 series, they're pretty cheap now with puny engines and they have room for a V8.

There were a couple limited-edition models of Mustang in the nineties with IRS, I hear those are kind of OK around a corner. But nothing compared to a rice box half the price or cheaper.

Right, but American engines aren't half as reliable as people make them out to be, either. They are often cheap to rebuild due to platform longevity, but that's not the same thing.

Nor, sadly, can Americans. The Japanese have it down, though. Germany is so-so.

Interesting, but still not clear why the failure occurred.

A very quick browse of available literature (VERY) suggests that laser sintering produces a very fine crystal structure, which suggests that the laser-sintered metal will have the same problem as other types of sintered metal. That fine crystal structure is inferior to a large grain structure. Parts will snap instead of bending when they do finally fail if sintered as compared to forged, or machined from forged billet.

Still cool for prototyping, and lots of parts. I'd rather have laser-sintered parts in my gun than traditional powder metal. I'd rather have parts made from forged billet than either.

Yes, they run clusters.

Yes, they are micros with very fancy network cards.

Your ego has run away with you, sort of like your need for antiquated affectations evinced by your need to make people read your comment in monospace. She was right, and you're wrong, and shut up.

I like to call that stuff devil worship, in order to separate it from satanism, which is not about worshipping anyone at all.

Yes, back then the italians and the brits made cars that handled while America built land yachts with live axle rear suspension that, as stated, are headed straight for the nearest ditch. Yes, literally all of the American sports cars had suspension no more advanced than a pickup truck — they had features like "stiffened sidewalls" for handling... wow! And I do mean wow.

Of course, Ford has continued this tradition. The live axles are gone, except for the Mustang. That will finally go IRS (a couple of special models aside) for 2015, the same year it gets the Ford Fusion grille that really bones the look of the car. I think it looks fine, but it doesn't really look like a Mustang from the front. Also, many of our large cars are now FWD, which is shit. It's okay for little peanut cars, but it's not reasonable to expect the same wheels to do steering and acceleration when the car is large.

American cars have been shit since forever. The only American production car which was provably better than the competition is probably the Model T, which seems a bit of a turd until you realize what a tank it is. And it was horribly complex to operate... The only thing we've done better than the others is the muscle car, and we've already discussed how they are ditch-seeking missiles.