You are the consumer, not the industry insider. If the sale was happening with the promise of an ever improving hydrogen infrastructure, and this didn't come to pass, then the promise leading to the sale was not fulfilled, and this could be seen as culpa in contrahendo.

If that argument holds, the court will decide. But as with every contract, they can be ligitated if one side feels wronged.

I understand the law suit. The car was sold to you as the future of movement, and without a steady hydrogen source, you don't get the movement.

A car is a tool to move people and stuff from A to B, and without fuel, it ceases to fulfill its promise, on which it was sold.

If we don't manage to use electricity to merge neutron stars, it's probably not feasible. Until then it's like making gold from lead by nuclear processes: doable, but the price per atom is not market compatible.

Exactly that's what rating is for: To know how much you can tow.

You can say out it loudly (or post it publicly, as proven right now.

We wait for the patch^B^B^B^B^Bconcrete sarcophagus.

See? In the U.S., many small cars which would be able to tow some serious loads, are not rated at all for towing. If they were, people would not use that argument very often. But apparently, in the U.S. mind, non-trucks are not able to tow.

If you can't sell off your old car at a decent price (and your car dealership also has the lot full of them), your calculation for the next truck has to include a higher deterioration, which makes buying your next truck more expensive. And financing the truck with a loan also might get harder, because your bank might also look into the resale value of your truck, because if they impound it, they don't want to sell it at too much of a loss.

Statistics. If you see a work trailer only on 1% of the trucks out there, you can be statistically sure that only 1% of all trucks are actually using their towing capacity.

I never understood the towing capacity argument. My tiny compact with a 1.6 liter Diesel engine has a towing capacity of 3400 pounds.

In C or C++, use the FILE and DATE macros. FILE includes the complete path, so something built on my machine is not the same as something built on your machine. And DATE is different if you re-compile in ten minutes.

If you build on a multi core system, it might matter which files finish compiling in which order. And some compilers are just non-deterministic. I used a compiler where the amount of optimisations was dependent on available memory.

Right now, if you are in China, WhatsApp is gone. If they had alternative stores, they would be told to remove WhatsApp, and if they donâ(TM)t comply, Apple would be ordered to remove the store. Which they would do very reluctantly.

If you managed to install it in another way, and the authorities find out, I wouldnâ(TM)t want to be in your place.

Browsers can have a list of websites that donâ(TM)t get any personal information. Any decent browser would support that. Any website must use an API that checks if it is in the list (the browser does the work). The user can at any time tell the browser to disallow or allow access to personal data; if it was already allowed and the site ignored it someone in authority will be told.

So if I want adverts and disallowed them, I go into a menu to allow it, the site gets refreshed, and shows me the ads I was missing so much. Or I disallow them and Iâ(TM)m never bothered again.

Thank you for missing the point and not actually addressing it. What that shows is that yes, there is a point where Israel will use its nuclear arsenal. Congratulations; that's true for every country with nukes. The point you are not addressing is that they've had many opportunities to use their nukes where they have not. Care to actually address that?

That's pretty obviously false given that Israel has not used those nukes. They've had repeated opportunities to nuke targets in Gaza, or nuke targets in Syria and Iran and have not done so. That shows that your second half of your sentence is pretty obviously false.