Until the IRS upgrades to the '90s and lets you use their website to file, I'm not really interested in filling out a million questions on some scammy website, or going to an accountant to fill out some basic paperwork anybody could do. It's easy enough to fill out the paper forms and mail in a check (though that is the only thing I am likely to write a check for, or put in the mail this year).
I was trying to figure out why people would say that she's connected to the NSA. I was wondering if they'd say that about anyone who served in the White House (Al Gore is on Apple's board). I guess to people subscribing to a team mentality, any member of the republican leadership must be working to promote the NSA, and all the brave democrats are fighting against it.
But in reality, it's pretty silly to think that she's going to advocate turning over all their data to the NSA just because she's on their board and has worked with the NSA in the past. It's also pretty silly to think the NSA hasn't already got that data without her help.
Ever heard of the placebo effect?
Yes, because it makes a whole lot of sense not to think of cars as technology, and Slashdot never reported on electric cars before Tesla.
This is from 2009, so they've probably done it by now.
After reading this article, there can be little doubt as to why doing things in NJ is so expensive.
You wouldn't ask why the mob is so influential, would you? This is the same kind of thing. A group of shady criminals demanding "protection money" from politicians.
The thing is this basically is a tariff war. There is no way this law would have been passed if Tesla built cars in New Jersey.
Interstate commerce means any work involving or related to the movement of persons or things across state lines. If you make a car in CA and take it to NJ, that's clearly interstate commerce, and the Federal Government is granted constitutional authority to regulate it. Maybe you are confused about what it means?
A company based in CA selling cars in NJ most certainly is interstate commerce.
Researchers have been making humanoid robots for much longer than they've been trying to make any of those other things you listed. And yet, such devices are still limited to doing simple tricks of little or no real value. In the mean time, robots designed for specific purposes (that look nothing like people) are used throughout society. Humanoid robots will always be much more complex, and much less stable, than their non-humanoid counterparts. So of course they will never be affordable because you will always be able to make a cheaper wheeled robot.
Also, it is baffling to me that anyone would throw away money on this line of research. The limits of this kind of robot should be obvious to all of us, since it would have all the same limits we do. But for some reason this idea is so compelling to the less logically minded masses that it attracts all kinds of money for research that is destined to lead nowhere.
I did watch the video. You certainly can use a regular loader or mini-excivator for disaster relief, so I don't know what they were on about. It was more like they wanted to make a cool robot exoskeleton, and they needed to come up with an excuse for why you would even want the stupid thing.
If they were really interested in disaster relief, they would be making attachments for compact loaders and mini-excivators, not ridiculous exo-skeletons that could never possibly be useful for that (or any other) application.
So it has 10 times the moving parts of a regular loader, but can lift less than 10% of the weight?
I know these things look cool in the cartoons, but there's a reason we don't build construction equipment this way. Things like these will never be as practical as wheeled and tracked vehicles.
Why investigate and attempt to solve a potential problem that your engineers have brought to you attention? There could be some risk involved (to your career). Better to do nothing and write a report later on saying there was nothing you could do.