Given the 3 examples given in the article, I would say that this time they are wrong. None of the items given as examples should be accessible to a minor without parents approval anyway, expecially if we are talking about medical items.
Not that I think that a law will magically change something, btw.
The problem is that the battery degrades, so it’s a good idea to keep it charges to 60-80% so that it last way longer. If you have 600 miles of max range then that means you can easily have 360-480 miles for your driving. This is overkill as well right ? Wrong, if you live in a cold climate it practically gets halved so now you have 180-240 miles of driving.
Fine, but you still fail to look how the car is used. A battery that big also mean more weight (and thus more energy needed) and it can make sense if you use the car almost always for longer trips. For shorter drive it make more sense to have a smaller battery and recharge more often.,
Let’s say it’s summer though, now you want to drive 600 miles to your nearest ocean/sea and want to sightsee along the way.
Here you fail to consider the target market. EU and US are very different geographically. In US a car with bigger batteries can make sense, in EU probably not that much.
VW simply design a car for the market where they want to sell it, which make sense in my opinion.
With a battery that big you might have to charge once and not even fully to have enough confidence driving to places where charging might be limited.
That would be a problem anyway, with limited charging options you could arrive at the sea but then have problem returning home (but this is a problem that is slowly going away)
That’s why smaller batteries make sense only if you use the car for daily commuting, now you need to rent or buy a proper long range gas car or ev car - which now costs you quite a bit more or adds inconvenience. With tesla the problem is almost solved, but they have problematic political views and minimalistic interiors and a max battery of 402 miles. So yeah I think it’s worth it to make a car that costs 3x what VW are pushing, but is useful to everybody.
I don't know how may miles you need to drive for your daily commute that need to have such big battery but in the supposed target market of the VW even a 180 miles battery can easily cover your weekly commuting.
So yes, you are right that a bigger battery is usefull but it really depend on where you plan to sell your car. Not everywhere you need that kind of mileage daily and you need also to consider other factors like the weight and size of the car.
I don’t get thesr automakers, who is this made for, don’t they see that tesla is killing it with their largr batteries.
It is made for people living in places where you maybe don't need to drive 50 miles to go to the nearest mall... a car with 600 miles autonomy would be an overkill if you just need to drive about 10/20 miles a day while commuting.
Why can’t they put a 600miles battery
because they are useless for the target market.
If you don't need to drive that long distance for everything, you don't need big batteries with all the associate problems (weight, dimension and so on) that in the end don't give you any real bonus if not the fact that maybe you can recharge it less often.
I get what you’re saying but the forgetful customer is explicitly what they said they want, which is dumb any way you look at it.
I don't disagree on that.
Many times you’re forced into signing up for subscription, or coerced under the guise of a free trial. Now this wouldn’t be as bad if they came back and were like, “hey we see you haven’t used our service in a while, do you still need it?”
Maybe, but at this point I doubt that a forgetful customer would pay attention to it. What would really make the difference would be to renew the subscription explicitly. This way you could be forced to sign for a false free trial, but you would also need to confirm a subsequent subscription.
rather than just leeching money from the user. The system is designed to purposely allow the user to make these errors and that’s wrong any way you want to shape it.
Yes, this is another way to see it. But the solution in my opinion is not to eliminate the concept of subscriptions. The solution is to educate the customer.
Fine, but this is on the buyer not on the seller.
I mean, if you buy a subscription to something and then don't use it (or forgot to cancel while not using it) is not really a seller fail: you would have wasted your money even you'd have bought it without a subscription.
I get subscriptions are (mostly) bad, but it is not always a seller fault and the buyer should be aware of what he is doing or spending money.
and then simulating all the toolpaths to be able to export the G code for a CNC machine. I don’t know how much of what I saw is smoke and mirrors, but even if that is a stretch goal it is quite significant.
<sarcasm>
Damn, I ascended to become an AI and I didn't realise it.
</sarcasm>
My point was that this already tested on a smaller scale with ships: the fuel changed and that changed the exhaust fumes ability to reflect sunlight which cause some problems the proponents of the solution have not foresee.
There are gasses and particles that can be released into the atmosphere that will reflect sunlight and warmth away from earth. In theory that could be done very quickly.
As far as I remember, that was tried with ships and it has some collateral effects that cause different damages to the oceans.
I don’t trust them considering their enthusiasm over it and the comments about Finnish history.
If, as it seems to emerge, they are "forced" to do it under legal advise, it is completely irrelevant that you (or anybody else for that matter) trust them or not.
About their "enthusiasm", all I can see is that after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Russia is not sees as that friendly and trustworthy anymore: they had a signed treaty with Ukraine to preserve Ukranian integrity in exchange of the nuclear weapons (from URSS), we see how much Russia valued their own word. I cannot blame someone from a country which share a border with Russia for not having simpaty for Russia.
True, someone innocent will pay, but it is not that different from having Russian scientist turned away from CERN or any other situation where there was a collaboration. It is sad but on the other hand it is a consequence.
Go read “Finnisu Civil War: History, Memory, Legacy” by Tepora and try to laugh at the comments about history. Impossible.
As you cannot laugh to any other memory of any other war.
I suppose any law in any jurisdiction you want to use it, don't you think ?
Guys, are you all really that young to not remember alla the fuss with crypto software ? Same thing here: you want to distrubute something in a country, you need to follow the country's law, even if they are stupid.
Even Wikipedia, which is a shockingly bloodthirsty pro-NATO outlet, admits there is zero proof that a “Russian state actor” did this, there are just “western security experts” claiming it (as usual), and opinion is divided.
Well, I don't think that a "[insert your preferred state] state actor" would ever coming out saying "yes, we tried to to it".
Not to say that what Wikipedia say is false but on the other hand I am not sure how to check if it is true, in these cases.
I know. I was only pointing out that you can have a waterproof phone and a replaceable battery. Obviously you need to do better than the S5 but it is nothing impossible, even wanting to keep the audio jack and the USB ports.
Given the 3 examples given in the article, I would say that this time they are wrong. None of the items given as examples should be accessible to a minor without parents approval anyway, expecially if we are talking about medical items.
Not that I think that a law will magically change something, btw.