Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:ICEs and petroleum need to go away (Score 2) 261

the cost for an EV will probably never come down to a parity with ICE cars

Most experts think that once the cost of a battery comes down, battery electric vehicles will cost less than ICE vehicles. Some people are claiming that BEVs are already cheaper than ICEVs if you take total cost of ownership into account.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/dec/01/electric-cars-already-cheaper-to-own-and-run-than-petrol-or-diesel-study

I have seen several people repeating the claim that when lithium batteries for cars drop below $100 per kilowatt-hour, BEVs will cost less than ICEVs and consumers will start switching to them to save money. Elon Musk has in the past said that 2020 could be the year this happens. (For Tesla, anyway, since Tesla built its own battery factory just to get the lowest cost on batteries.)

https://electrek.co/2017/01/30/electric-vehicle-battery-cost-dropped-80-6-years-227kwh-tesla-190kwh/

the only hope is for some type of battery that does not involve lithium

I'll bet you that BEVs will boom in the next few years, still using lithium batteries. The high price of lithium is sending a signal to the free market, and as a result more development of lithium resources is happening. If prices are high enough, lithium and other metals can be recovered from sea water, and we aren't running out of sea water anytime soon. Also, we haven't really started recycling lithium car batteries yet, but that's coming too.

According to this article a Tesla Model S only needs 15 pounds / 7 kg of lithium, about as much as a bowling ball; and experts think that just the lithium available from mining would be enough for 185 years.

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2017-lithium-battery-future/

Tons of research is going into batteries, but it is way too early to bet on a winning horse at this point.

For years I have been interested in batteries big enough to run an entire city ("grid-scale" batteries). I was assuming that something unusual like the liquid metal battery technology or flow batteries would be needed, but Tesla has started selling grid-scale lithium battery packs to Australia. So maybe lithium is even getting inexpensive enough for grid-scale. My understanding is that the Tesla battery in Australia can only supply power for a very short time, so I haven't lost interest in liquid metal or flow batteries.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/12/26/teslas-enormous-battery-in-australia-just-weeks-old-is-already-responding-to-outages-in-record-time/

http://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article/liquid-metal-battery-inventor-questions-lithium-ion-as-grid-scale-storage-solution-2017-03-29

Comment Wiretapping rules... (Score 3, Interesting) 354

Yes, being a common carrier would require them to comply with CALEA.

Without the rules, they just comply with CALEA voluntarily on Internet.

You still get wiretapped; you just don't get the projections that them being a common carrier would have afforded you otherwise.

For example: now that they are not common carriers, they no longer have to provide you with 911 service on your VOIP lines.

Comment Re:I admire them for being loyal to their companie (Score 1) 34

Your whole post is irrational, you "digital download" files from a DVD/CDROM to your computer when you copy it. A game is just a bunch of files, whether those files are on disc or on another computer that you copy.

The reality is any drm infested game, part of its files are held hostage on a computer at company headquarters, they can literally shut down the game you paid for, that's the fraud right there buddy because they've fraudulently taken the files and computer instructions hostage, they've coded the game in a way that's fraudulent and criminally against your rights as a paying customer to always access the game you paid for.

Comment Re:Not surprising... (Score 1) 296

In November 2009, the Airbus A330 became the first aircraft to receive ETOPS-240 approval, which has since been offered by Airbus as an option.[10]

On December 12, 2011, Boeing received type-design approval from the U.S. FAA for up to 330-minute extended operations for its 777-200LR, 777-300ER, 777F and 777-200ER equipped with GE engines, and with Rolls-Royce and Pratt & Whitney engines expected to follow.[11] The first ETOPS-330 flight took place on 1 December 2015 with Air New Zealand connecting Auckland to Buenos Aires on a Boeing 777-200ER.[12] On May 28, 2014, the Boeing 787 Dreamliner received its ETOPS-330 certificate from the FAA.[13]

The first time that ETOPS-330 approval was given to a four-engined aircraft was in February 2015, to the Boeing 747-8 Intercontinental.[14]

In October 2014 EASA certified the Airbus A350XWB to ETOPS-370.

Comment Re:Solution (Score 1) 199

Does it even need to be this hard?

Develop an e911 system and mandate (or even suggest) that mobile software makers have an option to turn it on. The mobile software makers can decide whether it defaults to on or off and the end user can switch the switch as often as they like.

Comment Re:it needs to be easy. (Score 1) 178

yep. needed because it *is* a direct tax.

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons

From Article I, section 2.

For this reason, the USSC struck down the income tax. as a direct tax.

Subsequently, the the XVIth amendment created an *exception* to this limit, not a reversal. Save for the income tax, direct taxes remain banned without apportionment.

hawk

Comment Re:I admire them for being loyal to their companie (Score 1) 34

American companies take the cake - windows 10 is literally spying on its own customers, and steam was much more invasive then anything sony released since Steam is now inside most popular high budget games. American's have out done the japanese by a large margin because they control the hardware and operating system that runs the worlds computers.

American companies are undermining the privacy and civil rights of the entire planet, it's hard to compete with valve /w steam, apple, and microsoft's windows 10.

Comment Re:I admire them for being loyal to their companie (Score 0) 34

if you suggest that it might be a good thing to support an American console company like Microsoft, everyone glares at you like you just said "I love Hitler" and kicked a puppy. .

You may not be aware that's because american companies treat their paying customers like dirt, like Microsoft trying to get rid of game ownership for the xbox and make every future game "always online" internet connected, aka getting rid of your customers rights to own their own games and be left the fuck alone. But ideological hyper capitalist chimpanzee's seem to think anything a big company does must be good for everyone(tm). Right now the entire game industry is literally destroying and doing nasty shit to videogames making them impossible to preserve and use in 20 years, no one with half a brain as a paying customer is going to respect an organization that is outright criminally hostile towards you and kicking you in the nuts in terms of game ownership.

Loot boxes, microtransactions, drm and attack on game ownership are the reason everyone looks at you like you're stupid because you are lacking any awareness of what these companies have been doing to their customers: Treating them like shit.

If you treat your paying customers like shit and like they're criminals, then you should expect to become a despised company in return for your gloriously corrupt anti customer policies.

Comment Re:They should talk to Congress, not courts. (Score 1) 178

> That isn't self-consistent.

No, you missed everything. That is simply what the law is right now, despite your attempt to impose your own structure on it.

>but your word game is about something different than what I said.

My "word game" is explaining that what you wrote just isn't the issue here, but rather a common misconception.

Texas cannot pass a tax on a New York Merchant.

But no such tax is involved when Texas imposes a use tax on a Texan for a purchase from a New York merchant. The issue is that it can only look to the Texan, not the yorker.

(Actually, at *some* level of sales, the yorker would have sufficient contacts with Texas that Texas could assert jurisdiction under International Shoe and its progeny, but that would only make money for lawyers, and the costs of litigating these would drive what happened).

>Congress is welcome to pass a law requiring states who do collect a sales or use tax to require
>reciprocal reporting with other states that also require it,

There are issues about mandating the state participation. Again, states probably have to opt in

>but you're going to need some very new rulings from the Court before you manage to put
>requirements on people in states like Oregon that have neither of those things.

No, not if you are actually familiar with the past rulings. USSC has made it clear that they are interpreting in the absence of legislation, no mandating. This is properly Congress' domain, not the courts. However, when Congress doesn't act, the courts still have to handle disputes.

As I wrote, it would be difficult to force states in, but Congress can also regulate the shipments themselves if it comes to it. Even if it can't force a state in (that could go either way at the USSC), it can impose requirements on the shippers.

And as a practical matter, states without sales taxes have nothing to collect, so might want not to opt in (again, assuming their Constitutional issue is decided in their favor), so as to give their merchants an edge in other states. For better or worse (and I'd argue worse), Congress has been quite effective in using road construction and other issues to trample on state prerogatives in the past (55, .08, and so forth). Or different postal rates for states that opt in. Or (more practically) regulating the large sites that most sellers use to get found. Or an excise tax on the act of shipping (rather than the goods themselves) out of that state. Or . . .

But in the end, this is for Congress.

Comment Re:it needs to be easy. (Score 1) 178

>Sales by zip code will not work, because zip codes do not follow municipal lines.

That's just too bad.

Zip code already exists in all transactions.

The five digit sips can be changed, or the localities or states can solve the division for the zip code.

Using zip is the least burdensome way to deal with distribution, and those jurisdictions unwilling to accept that can just not opt in and try to collect the tax themselves . . .

hawk

Slashdot Top Deals

The rich get rich, and the poor get poorer. The haves get more, the have-nots die.

Working...