Good point. Many Tesla line employees probably previously worked at NUMMI building Toyota and GM vehicles....which is the facility Tesla now operates.
Boston
blmuskrat
More like: to be completely fair, this accident was completely avoidable with good defensive driving skills.
For the record, I’m not making it out to be extraordinary that Trump did it. I don’t even support the guy, FWIW. I’m saying it’s the reason some soldier’s, from the same Division (is that the right term for the SEALs?) as a fallen soldier, who probably already heavily lean Trump in their personal views decided to…
Oh, for sure it’s not appropriate. Even disrespectful in many ways. BUT I can understand why it happened, and I would wage this is a case of not considering the grander impact of the action, more than anything else.
While against protocol, and some punishment is deserved, I think some of the rhetoric in this article is uncalled for. Didn’t Trump just make a trip to pay respect to the SEAL who was killed in a recent raid? Couldn’t this possibly be a show of support for that action?
The truth is this is how it has to be. You can sell a car like this without the definite infrastructure. You’ve then created the market demand for the infrastructure, which grows as the segment grows. The two basically feed of each other, and eventually the market for 100% EV vehicles is viable as well.
The “spike” (metaphorically speaking, not sure about an ACTUAL spike) only really works until the danger is normalized. Take you ‘73 Beetle example. NOW it feels less safe, because you have modern cars to compare it to. In 1973 it was pretty much par for the course, and much hooning was done.
Neutral: Considering the right’s consistent push for states rights over federal regulation, it should be interesting to see where they fall in the the CARB vs EPA fight. My guess is the hypocrisy will rear its head.
1% of $8B is $80M. If there’s some capitol gains tax, or fees etc.. (would be 10% in this case) and it’s $72M.
Flying through cloud cover, in severe turbulence, on the date of the Mayan Apocalypse (Friday Dec 21, 2012).
Fixed this for you, in context of this tweet:
Outside of the whole “Baja/Gauanjuato” thing, Trumps point is consistent. However, this isn’t about “saving jobs”, it’s not even about “creating jobs” (although he wants you to think it is). It’s a discriminatory attack against Mexico. His position is basically:
The Dodge Durango screams of the interior stylist saying “screw it” to the engineer’s request for packaging space for the power point...and nobody having the balls to call it out.
This is actually a major talking point, and one of the bigger hurdles facing developers of autonomous technology today. I’m not sure what the current thinking is, but you should be somewhat at ease realizing it is being talked about, and worked on as a known concern with autonomous technology.
There is a point where being “soft on the brakes” performs worse than an ABS system obviously. You’re better off having ABS as a safety net, and trying to hit the limit, than under performing trying not to hit the limit. Basically:
Considering Russia has a successful space program that we also contract to bring astronauts and supplies to ISS, I’d say that’s a much better indicator of their ability to launch a weapon than some old as aircraft carrier.
One thing I think the argument against hydrogen is missing (from an electrical capacity stand point) is the difference between a facility with infrastructure built specifically to handle the demand of producing the hydrogen, vs the current infrastructure across the US which is aging, and possibly not able to support…
Have you ever heard the phrase, “bombs bursting in air”, coined some time around 1814? (If you’re American I hope so...)
Cuba has done “fine” for the past 60 years. The threat is empty, because it’s not taking anything away, it’s just maintaining the status quo - which is easy to do.