This page shows a lot of staged "tragedies" from the adversaries of Israel:

http://zombietime.com/reuters_photo_fraud/

Perhaps the most interesting thing is, that Reuters, Associated Press and more keep buying the pictures, apparently with no quality control.

Funny how a game can emulate reality, and then reality can re-emulate the game: http://www.molleindustria.org/en/oiligarchy

... especially for dictators. Finally you're able to out those pesky rebels.

CS students with no experience with Linux when they start?

Damn.

RTFA. It says American car makers haven't implemented the technology, because it isn't tested by the EPA when rating the efficiency.

Everybody knows it improves efficiency. But because it isn't a part of the test, it's not implemented.

Once again: If you're driving a gas guzzler, you don't care about 5-10% saving.

It's a bit like saying "This is stupid, because the Formula 1 car I'm driving is seldom at a complete halt".

If you wish to drive in a gas guzzler, go ahead. If you wish to be sensible and save a few bucks, you probably are not driving a gas guzzler and you would probably like another 5-10% saving.

The only thing wrong with this, otherwise well thought-out, statement is the fact that there's hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of cars with this technology on the roads today.

I somehow think, that it would have been in the news if people owning a MINI, a BMW, a Toyota or VW with this technology had to replace their battery once a year. For some reason, it doesn't seem to be the case.

Of course a V8 requires more power to start.

But if you're driving a V8, you apparently doesn't care about gas consumption, and the 5-10% saving that start-stop provides doesn't matter.

For the eco-friendly and/or guy on a budget, 5-10% gas saving annually on your commuting matters.

We all know how American cars compare to the rest of the auto industry when it comes to reliability.

BMW, VW, Toyota and other brands manage to apply this technology without - apparantly - a huge increase in maintenance cost for the end-consumer.

In a TCO showdown between a start-stop car from any of the three companies and a similarly priced American car, what car would you expect to come out on top?

I found this: http://www.tayna.co.uk/063-Numax-Car-Battery-P937.html

Specs:
Voltage - 12V
Capacity - 44Ah
CCA(SAE) - 360A

Dimensions(mm)
210 x 175 x 175

Does not look special at all.

Did use start-stop.

Don't know about the battery specs, but from I've been able to google in the last 5 minutes, it looks like a totally normal car battery.

Well, I could rewrite to say: "If it's not being tested or measured by the government, it's not worth caring about".

Just because it isn't tested by EPA, doesn't mean it's a stupid thing to do.

Imagine if Ford had done this 10 years ago, and rumor had spread among car owners that "those non-hippie gasoline/diesel powered cars from Ford are really energy efficient". Perhaps they would have a larger market share today.

Of course, that requires thinking that goes beyond the next quarterly earnings report - something that's often hard to do for such companies.

Well, Volkswagen made the Lupo back in the 90s. It was able to achieve 78 miles to the US gallon with a 1.2L diesel engine.

So, I guess he's full of it, if the battery pack on the big American cars are unable to store enough energy.

... "If it's not being tested or measured, it's not worth doing".

We all know, the main reason is that pre-iPad tablets kinda had to be placed on the table. It made it impossible to use Facebook while in a boring meeting, compared to an ordinary laptop where the screen provided some privacy.