The data seem to indicate Model 3s hold value quite well:
    https://insideevs.com/features...
It may drop with new features as you suggest, but there is also the fact that old cars get features via OTA (very rare for other cars) and that EVs tend to hold up well over time (Tesla's initial quality problems matters less for a vehicle you can inspect before buying).

I don't own an EV but my next car will be one. Right now that means a Tesla unless some competition really improves their game. I considered the first Leaf when it came out but the range wasn't sufficient.

Agreed. It is great to see bipartisan unity on the really important issues.

For investing there is a big difference between knowing something is likely vs a sure thing. A quick $2000 stimulus was also a campaign promise, and if you banked on that you lost.

You seem to follow the logic that following the laws and regulations means something is moral:
    "argument that it is immoral ... However, she followed due diligence by reporting ... as required by law"
Some countries have capitol punishment for stealing. Is that then moral?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

If it's ok she knows for certain other things people could guess, then the SEC should open up insider trading for everyone. Very rarely are announcements made that weren't reasonably likely potential outcomes. As a bonus, making it legal would make it moral -- or did I miss something?

Seems like sane policy. Which country?

Here's a randomized double-blind clinical trial:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Oh but it's small you say. Did we engage in giant studies before deciding to distance, wash hands, or wear masks? No, we move forward and gain data along the way. Hell, we still clean surfaces despite zero evidence of transmission via surfaces:
    https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/n...

And of course there are a lot of studies and evidence piling up on vitamin D, nearly all pointing in the same direction:
    https://www.youtube.com/c/Camp...

Do you also advocate waiting 3-6 years to make sure the vaccines work, as is typically done? There are times where you want to wait to be 99.9% sure, but there are other times, like in a pandemic where 90% is what you go with to end the predictable known suffering of the alternatives.

"tend" would imply it's more common than not. Also, YouTube is a right-wing rabbit hole, echo chamber, so we should be able to find lots of videos backing up your stance. Let's see:
    https://www.youtube.com/result...
I scrolled through about 100, and none of them make the claim you say supporters "tend" to push.
I see doctors, scientists, a few news items, and random people all saying about the same thing. This could help if you have a vitamin D deficit, in particular as many people spend more time indoors due to lockdowns and winter.

Your argument is about as sound as saying "masks are bad because bank robbers wear them".
And there is truth to what you say regarding the politicization of masks. Not vitamin D though, you're just making it up because you like the sound of that being similar. Let's not politicize it too.

While it is sad how big and inefficiently US presidents travel, it is an extraordinarily dangerous job, perhaps only below being a prosecutor in Latin America going against the cartels. A president has a ~7% chance of dying during a 4-year term.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Given that CA's mean wage $75,400 is while Kentucky's is $50,701, isn't that fair? Are we against progressive taxation and some amount of redistribution now? Or should redistribution only be within-state? -- a rather Libertarian argument.

The net (mean wage + per capita inflow) for CA and KY is $75,052 and $56,685, respectively. That pretty much sums up why the working rich would much rather be in CA, NY and similar states even though money is "taken" from them.

I live in CA, and while I don't mind high taxes per se, however they seem to be spending it quite inefficiently. If CA ever loses Silicon Valley, we are quite screwed due to that inefficiency. As Elon Musk summed it up, CA is too used to winning (as it the US in general). Regardless if everything else he says or does is wrong, that quote is spot on.

~$20B of taxes paid in from 2017-2019.

Source: Alphabet 10Q, see "Cash paid for taxes, net of refunds".

FUD over Huawei?! I thought it was politics, but I did some digging...

After *five years*, Huawei still haven't been able to address severe security concerns the UK had (below is just a subset of problems from the report I link, any one of which would make infosec get up and leave the room). I would imagine *all* agencies have access to a Huawei device within seconds of access.

And note: This is just looking at their cell-tower switch product, with their cooperation:

The report analyzed the use of the commonly used and well maintained open source component OpenSSL. OpenSSL is often security critical and processes untrusted data from the network and so it is important that the component is kept up to date.

  In the first version of the software, there were 70 full copies of 4 different OpenSSL versions, ranging from 0.9.8 to 1.0.2k (including one from a vendor SDK) with partial copies of 14 versions, ranging from 0.9.7d to 1.0.2k, those partial copies numbering 304.
  Fragments of 10 versions, ranging from 0.9.6 to 1.0.2k, were also found across the codebase, with these normally being small sets of files that had been copied to import some particular functionality.
  There were also a large number of files, again spread across the codebase, that had started life in the OpenSSL library and had been modified by Huawei.

And then the bit about memcopy... holy heck...
  There were over 5000 direct invocations of 17 different safe memcpy()-like functions and over 600 direct invocations of 12 different unsafe memcpy()-like functions. Approximately 11% of the direct invocations of memcpy()-like functions are to unsafe variants.
  There were over 1400 direct invocations of 22 different safe strcpy()-like functions and over 400 direct invocations of 9 different unsafe strcpy()-like functions. Approximately 22% of the direct invocations of strcpy()-like functions are to unsafe variants.
  There were over 2000 direct invocations of 17 different safe sprintf()-like functions and almost 200 direct invocations of 12 different unsafe sprintf()-like functions. Approximately 9% of the direct invocations of sprintf()-like functions are to unsafe variants.

These numbers do not include any indirect invocation, such as through function pointers and the like. It is worth noting these unsafe functions are present in the binary and therefore pose real risk.

  Analysis of relevant source code worryingly identified a number pre-processor directives of the form “#define SAFE_LIBRARY_memcpy(dest, destMax, src, count) memcpy(dest, src, count)”, which redefine a safe function to an unsafe one, effectively removing any benefit of the work done to remove the unsafe functions in the source code. There are also directives which force unsafe use of potentially safe functions, for example of the form “#define ANOTHER_MEMCPY(dest,src,size) memcpy_s((dest),(size),(src),(size))”

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/790270/HCSEC_OversightBoardReport-2019.pdf

I predict the next vaccine will announce 94% effectiveness.

We'll know they are messing with us when someone accidentally claims 102% effectiveness.

Jokes aside, I hope these results hold up under longer analyses, but it's super promising to see what appears to be high-ish confidence that it'll be effective enough (>70%) to drop R0 well under 1.

This Nature news article seems to indicate as of August that researchers were hopeful from early results, very different from what you are implying. Also, B and T cell responses are quite typical for vaccines after long periods, and still work pretty rapidly; antibodies dropping after a couple months is common. If you've got a reference as to why that will not affect replication factor, I would love to see it.

I'm sure this first crop of vaccines won't be perfect, but all we need to do is get the R01, and even with a 50% effective vaccine that would work for most places with only minor economically-tolerable restrictions (encourage mask-wearing, lower indoor density, limit large crowds where possible). And yes, I'll be taking my dose when it's my turn; just like I take a brand-new flu vaccine every year to do my part. Life has some risk.

... I'm thinking Stardust gives that a run on the money? It was cheaper, sure ($0.2 billion), but it returned a *total* mass of just 0.000000000000001g (source). Which means that material is worth 10^16 more than OSIRIS-REx's material.

Anything ad-supported will have significant GDPR implications, unless they are untracked completely-untargeted display ads, which can only support the lowest-tiers of cheap content. And yes even newspapers have to do some tracking on their ads to limit fraud (widespread fraud results in rate collapse, and thus revenue collapse). Subscription models greatly advantage existing large players and make it hard for any startup to break into a market.

In your perfect future where everything is a $10+/month subscription, you'll be writing articles about how the poor are being locked out.

I'm not saying the GDPR is without it's value and uses, but it does result in a compliance overhead. Large companies tend to like the most regulations, as they have the power to lobby for advantageous changes, and the resources to comply at a small percentage overhead.

This is now the norm for deliveries in California, and I assume it's happening elsewhere. There's been a steady rise in stolen packages, and that was probably making it hard to insure and/or eat the losses. In bulk, you are right it's unwieldy, but it's super-useful in the small fraction of contested deliveries.