Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Deal of the Day - Pay What You Want for the Learn to Code Bundle, includes AngularJS, Python, HTML5, Ruby, and more. ×

Comment Re:Bullshit (Score 1) 31

1) These environmental guidelines are useful for sustaining life on earth.

They are apparently more useful for sustaining life outside of the US than they are inside the US.

2) Moving to Mexico won't help.

It'll help Tesla and Mexico a great deal.

3) If you are worried about not being able to compete with Mexico, argue to your (potential) customers.

Are your potential customers going to adjust US regulations? Or are they going to buy a more expensive product just to save a negligible amount of pollution emissions?

Comment Here's the answer (Score 1) 440

There's a simple one word answer to why car salespeople don't like electric vehicles, options. The car manufacturer sells the car and publicizes a recommended price. The dealerships are thereby very limited as to how much they can charge for the base car itself. Thus, most of their profit comes from everything else that they can sell on top of that base car, the "options". This can be fancy protective coatings, electrically powered systems (brakes, steering, windows), A/C, nitrogen-filled tires, bling hubcaps, fancy service plans, etc.

An SUV with a massive power source can be packed fill of high margin bling and options while a skimpy electric vehicle can't. Bottom line is that car dealerships and their salespeople get much more profit per SUV than they do per electric car. That completely explains the dislike for electric vehicles.

Comment Re:Cost of access is key. (Score 1) 314

Oh please show how the present cost of an interplanetary unmanned mission is mostly the access to orbit.

You're trying to say that they would continue to spend vast sums on development of single, small, incredibly optimized vehicles when they could cheaply throw together something much larger, more capable, and a higher number of units for orders of magnitude less money per vehicle?

The space probes and satellites operating in space now had to pay an ante of $5,000-20,000 per kg just to get in space, not just for the spacecraft, but also for any propellant needed in addition. Of course, the designers spent a lot of money to optimize the vehicle so that they got the most out of the vehicle. With free access to space, the need to do that costly optimization goes away.

There's also some engineering rules of thumb right now. Currently, a spacecraft tends to have launch costs around 5-20% of the total value of the vehicle. A higher share of launch costs tends to be on high risk vehicles (like low value, sacrificial packages sent up on the first few flights of a new vehicle) and a lower share for government agencies throwing really expensive probes or spy satellites on a rocket.

Comment Re:anti-business liberal scoring points (Score 1) 314

he was talking about the fact that there is not even the teeniest tiniest business case that can be made for building a human spaceflight program to Mars

Rich billionaire is willing to spend X to get to Mars for a tourist trip. Cost is Y where Y
You can do the same calculation for more customers. The problem here is that Y>X. Bring the cost down and the business cases appear.

Comment Re:Cost of access is key. (Score 1) 314

Posit: Access to orbit is free. Everything else stays the same price. Now what? Who cares? Why? What for? THOSE are the critical questions.

You'd have near future orbital joyrides and near free suborbital transportation. Interplanetary unmanned missions drop by orders of magnitude in cost, putting them well in the range of well funded researchers, entrepreneurs, and hobbyist groups. Manned Mars missions would be well within the capabilities of national groups looking to make a mark. It might be within the capabilities of the extremely wealthy and large corporations too.

For the next half century, I think we'd start seeing colonization of the Moon, Mars, and asteroids.

Comment Re:Why would Disney do this? (Score 1) 260

UAW is not, as far as I can determine, a corporation.

You are correct in that labor unions are not called corporations by the US code of laws. The UAW may indeed not be officially incorporated (I too am unable to determine its exact legal status). But the UAW has a charter and means to insure its perpetuation, holds assets, can be sued, and its members are not financially responsible for the actions of the union. It is also treated identically to official corporations for purposes of "corporate personhood" (eg, the "Citizens United" ruling by the US Supreme Court).

So yes, the occasional exception exists but it remains the exception, not the rule.

There are a lot of exceptions to the rule. The point here is that corporation and related legal groupings like religious groups or labor unions are powerful legal tools for organizing a group of people when liabilities or assets of value are involved. The majority are for profit, because for profit businesses are both numerous and always involve liabilities and assets.

The original claim was that the "only purpose" for corporations to exist was profit. I gave two large categories of exceptions: non profit charities and labor unions. Another large category of non profit corporations in the US are homeowners associations.

But even in for profit corporations, it is clear that there are other goals than merely profit. Bylaws can list other goals that the corporation must meet. The business can arbitrary chose legally binding non profit goals (like advertising "10% of all our sales goes to a charity") or make charitable donations with the approval of the shareholders.

Comment Re:Why would Disney do this? (Score 1) 260

The Chinese are going to find out what happens when your wages get to a certain point. Soon we'll be hearning about the overpass Chinese workers costing too much. Pretty simple, a combination of human nature, monetary facts of life, and pathological pecuniary shakers and movers.

The US had a similar situation in the decades leading up to the First World War. Human nature was the same. Monetary facts of life were the same. The greed was the same. Somehow the facts of life turned out differently than you suggest with the US experiencing a century of prosperity.

Comment Re:Kind of like some families named "Koch" in the (Score 1, Flamebait) 251

Are you unaware that the Koch brothers finance a lot of right-wing extremists? There's nothing "unhinged" about opposing people who undermine our political process by helping RWNJs get elected via their disproportionate influence. Money should not equal political power in a democracy.

So what? Their "right-wing extremists" are better than a lot of things they could be funding.

"For the love of phlegm...a stupid wall of death rays. How tacky can ya get?" - Post Brothers comics