Re: This is not abuse of blockchain. This is a primary use case.
The case you bring up also means that cost is not an object. Nationstates can afford much more than a lone hacker running a botnet for fun and profit.
1163 posts • joined 10 Aug 2012
The case you bring up also means that cost is not an object. Nationstates can afford much more than a lone hacker running a botnet for fun and profit.
"Have a guess how many competitors of Tesla would want to look at Tesla's 'secret sauce' for producing not many cars of poor quality that can kill you? Maybe some for the lolz but not for any competitive edge."
It would be handy to know what they are paying for each component part, having a complete list of suppliers and what Tesla is spending on warranty could be good info to have. How about what the Supercharger network costs to run and how they are structuring deals with power companies.
The car itself isn't a big deal. Competitors are already buying them and taking them to bits. That's normal. If they don't want to do the work themselves, they can buy a report with a full analysis on a tear down and just take the car they bought and run it for more subjective data. It's not intuitive, but the finished product is less interesting than the accounting.
"The data is presumably going to journalist "
Then the person is an idiot. Depending on the information that they harvested, other car companies might be quite interested in exchanging a briefcase full of cash for a copy. Multiply that by 10-12 companies and a few other interested parties and that could be a healthy stash tucked away from the sight of the tax man somewhere.
Going to a journalist is an emotional choice. Not impossible, but in a case like this, it's a bigger slap to Elon's face for him to eventually find out that his competitors all have a copy of his data (nothing provable, of course) than to have it paraded in the media (which might wind up happening anyway).
"Tesla is a big threat to many car manufacturers."
Not really. If they were making shed loads of profit, they might be, but anybody can lose money with a sexy product.
"And so the bigger question might be: who's getting the data? With Tesla data, there's lots of potential buyers, with SpaceX, only a few. It's also possible that SpaceX does have a data breach and either doesn't know or hasn't figured who the leaker is yet."
There may be fewer customers for SpaceX data, but they are bigger and the information could be more valuable. Neither company has tech data worth all that much, but detailed financials might be very interesting and details about talks with potential customers would be very valuable.
"This is strange that they don't have law enforcement involved as other companies many times will."
Tesla will need to file a suit today if they haven't already since they have named the person and made public accusations against them. They will also need a judge to approve any subpoenas they want to serve and to issue any data preservation orders. If Tesla wants to prefer any criminal charges, they will have to present a case to the District Attorney who will direct that an arrest warrant is issued if the DA believes that there is a case.
"Considering amount of bullshit Tesla PR machine and Musk himself dump on public and shareholders what makes you think this particular nugget is made of a pure gold ?"
I was thinking the same thing. Elon was sounding like he was attributing all of the negative reports of the past 6 months on planted information from this person. "Let load up this goat with all of our lies and drive him into the desert." Gold? No more than 8ct on the outside.
Chances are that the nuclear plant would have held up very well to an airplane crash. The containment buildings are designed with that in mind. Search YouTube for video of crash tests where a fighter plane was flung at a mock up of a containment building wall. It's impressive. The World Trade Center buildings were an easy, high profile target for inexperienced pilots to hit. Washington DC might have been too hard of a nut to crack, though with the strike on the Pentagon, maybe it wouldn't have been.
I don't like Sodium cooled reactors for the same reason you are pointing out. Leaking hot Sodium metal is a massive hazard. There is a reactor in Japan where they dropped a crane into the Sodium pool. That spelled the end of that reactor and I think it is still just sitting there waiting to be cleaned up.
The nuclear power stations that have been built before are the ones that shouldn't be considered. Using the criteria that only installed designs should be considered means that there will be no advancements in nuclear plant designs. I'd like to see a modern LFTR plant put into operation. There has never been a commercial one of those built and the last test model that was run didn't have a turbine attached so it just made heat and naught else.
For nuclear power to be viable, there has to be improvements made to the designs with preference for ones that can "burn down" existing nuclear waste that has been generate thus far with the old designs.
One problem is maintaining flow in a river or you wind up with big tides downstream of the dams. Hydro plants can throttle a little bit, but it's better to think of them as base load plants.
There are pumped storage facilities in different parts of the world that aren't on a river and do what you are describing. They take excess power from the grid to pump water uphill and release it when needed. The one in Wales is about 25% efficient. That's not huge, but much of the power they use is from wind and the turbines would have to be shut down if the pumps weren't using it so that 25% figure has to be adjusted from a purely kWh calculation. I'd like to see more of that type of facility being built.
"if it doesn't charge on a windless night, then you don't go to work in the morning. Welcome to the Green world of unreliable inefficiency...."
That assumes that you use a full charge to get to work and back. With a 240 mile range, that's one heck of a commute. If you have a far more average 20 mile commute each way, that's almost a week of going to work and back.
The ideal grid storage battery may be EV's. Especially EV fleets used by government agencies, the Post Office, etc etc. There are some fleets that plug into V2G systems. The company that runs the cars manages how much charge they need to have and when so they don't have flat batteries and the grid can use them for balancing when they need to. I think I saw that on "The Fully Charged Show" on YouTube. It might have been Transport Evolved, can't remember. The idea is that with EV's, power can be moved around to take stress off the the grid and base load + intermittent power can be used far more efficiently. Something that can't be done with petrol. I can have a contract that says I'm happy to take and pay for all of the power my EV will accept and the grid can buy back anything they want that doesn't leave me with less than a certain percent of charge unless I indicate that I want a full charge for a trip I'm going to take.
In Japan there is already a company that has designed and implemented the hardware to take a certain brand of used vehicle batteries, stack them in a storage container and use them as storage at solar farms so they can sell power when it fetches the best price rather than being constrained to only being able to sell power when the sun is up. I have seen other startups that do the same to turn used Prius batteries into home storage batteries. That should get more prevalent in the future. A 60kWh battery pack from a Bolt that has lost 1/3 of its capacity isn't great to have in the car, but 40kWh is a ton of power for a home back up including being able to juice up the EV with the new battery pack fitted with power that was harvested during the day from solar panels on the roof.
The story has me wondering if the city's internet/servers are all combined. I would have mission critical things such as the 911 system separate from the servers that have the city website and services. The same would go for police and fire dispatch/data services. If it only takes an attack on one location to completely mangle everything, it's not a good design.
How about Apple buys the Model 3 and Model S tear down reports from Munro & Associates ($150kish, maybe less), Buys a few different EV models to tear down themselves ($300K) and puts $2billion into producing their own car?
Tesla needs profits or they would just be swapping debt from one place for debt in another. It's a gamble to think that putting more money in is going to get them to profitability. There is no advantage for Apple to make a huge investment in them.
Let's hope that they can get out of their leases without too big of a penalty. Being unemployed in the Silicon Valley is a fast ticket to also being homeless due to the costs.
"I doubt that semantically speaking, the Leaf is actually "made" in Sunderland. "
Many Tesla Fanbois make the "made in USA" claim. The ugly truth is that there are lots of parts coming from Asia. Some recent stories about Tesla having to re-machine loads of parts showed crates piled up with Asian "from" labels. I also think that Munro & Assoc. did a breakdown of parts sources for the Model 3, but the full report costs a big pile of money so it's not something that can be easily searched. Sandy Munro has shown a bunch of parts that were from outside the US in interviews.
Having the assembly in country is a good thing. That's where many of the jobs are had. Lots of the sub-assemblies might be coming from automated lines. The first world governments are trying to ban the foundry and forge industries since they are "high carbon impact" businesses. Metal processing in the US has gone to the dogs with most metals coming from overseas. The President can add all the tariffs he likes on imports, but the horse has already left the barn. The remaining problems are the companies themselves. They make a limited range of alloys and will only cater to very high volume markets such as automotive manufacturing. If you want a low carbon alloy for magnetic applications, they won't talk to you at all. If they do give you 10 seconds, you would have to promise full mill runs (that's a S-Ton of metal). The next round of "carbon" taxes will kill off most of what's left in the US and move it just over the border to Mexico where pollution limits are highly negotiable (in cash, to the right inspector). Bad news for Texas when the wind is from the southwest.
The needs of travelers in the early 1900s was much different than today. People weren't driving their cars daily, towns were smaller and electricity wasn't as ubiquitous. Electric cars were preferred since they were quieter, cleaner and easier to drive. Another issue was that petrol came in tins purchased at the chemist rather than pumps. The chemist frequently could be out of stock and not know when the next shipment would come in.
A visit to a forecourt for a petrol/diesel can take 15 minutes if there is a queue. If you want a vehicle that will charge from flat to 95% in 15 minutes (80% would be a better target), you have to be prepared to hoist a large cable with a massive connector to handle the currents involved. That's rarely needed, though. The vast majority of people are NOT driving further than 250 miles in one go and since it's possible to easily charge an EV each night and have a full charge each morning, it's far different in having greater range in a petrol car to reduce the number of trips to the gas station. Your comment about having to visit a "designated recharge location" is silly. You've just described a petrol station. If you are in Europe or the UK, Shell is installing rapid chargers in their forecourts, so there you go.
The battle of the plugs is between Tesla, which have gone with their own proprietary charging scheme and the two other standards that everybody else uses, ChaDeMo and CCS(?). The latter two are commonly available at all DC fast charger locations and Tesla is having to install their own network since they chose not to go with an industry standard. A Tesla can use ChaDeMo with an adapter, purchased separately. This is no different than choosing between petrol and diesel to match what your car needs. Unless you buy a Tesla and then need to visit a Tesla station. Tesla likes it that way. They could have been making loads of money on charging if they didn't go with their own scheme. Beta vs. VHS.
For many long trips, a long range EV can work just fine. At the distances where charging times are adding a significant amount of time, you will have probably wanted to fly anyway. If you have other people with you, especially children, you are going to be stopping more frequently than you NEED to recharge anyway, so plugging in at those short stops is worthwhile with a longer stop for meals where a bulk of recharging can be done. I drove half way across the US for the 2017 total eclipse and kept track of my stops and mileage (ICEV). I would have added about 1.5-2 hours each way with an EV, but I would have shaved 75% of the fuel cost from the trip. Sadly, while taking the train was only twice as long, it was twice as expensive too.
"Even France and the UK plan to ban new cars by 2040 (which is rather less than your "30 years", but is distant enough that it could easily slip)."
I expect that many of those bans will be pushed some more years out until it's mostly unnecessary to implement them. There will be some that need liquid fueled cars/trucks for towing and other heavy work. The massive additional energy density of petrol/diesel over batteries will still be relevant for years in certain applications.
"Trump needs to 'think of the children' rather than himself and enriching his family."
And Ms. Clinton would have been different how?
"Neither are solar and wind, because after 20+ years you need to replace the infrastructure. I'd bet the junk this creates has a higher volume than nuclear waste ;)"
20 years is optimistic. Not too far from where I live is a wind area (it's windy right now) with derelict turbines only 10 years old. Once the manufacturer updates their products or loses out to other companies and shuts down, there aren't spare parts to be had to repair existing infrastructure. The new turbines are larger and on bigger pylons so the old ones have to be completely torn down one rusty bolt at a time. I'm not sure if it isn't cheaper to install them over tearing them down. New parts go together much easier and faster than torching a tower structure apart.
"The disposal and cleanup costs are borne by public funds with private contributions. No-one will insure them either (hundreds if not thousands of years of liabilities) so again public funds will cover that."
In the US, it was decided that the government would be responsible for nuclear waste disposal. The government generates a fair quantity from weapons and from reactors used on naval ships. It's also, theoretically, better to not trust a for-profit, private company that may just continue dumping 55 gallon drums of waste into the sea instead of properly disposing of it to "maximize value for the shareholders". I see it as also putting the screws on the government to get on with it and there is the faint possibility of getting around NIMBY complaints, etc.
B612 is trying to keep us informed, but there is still a lot of working out to come up with something to push things out of the way.
Perhaps an Earth defense system should be a higher priority than sending a flag planting team to Mars. There are lots of ideas but, so far, no money to try them out. Basing a system on the moon could be a good plan. It takes a much smaller rocket to launch from the moon and the launch site can have a permanently cleared safety zone downrange where it's pretty certain that a random person isn't going to wander across scrubbing a launch.
Asteroids are tough to spot so any defense system is going to need to be able to be deployed very quickly. Comets can be seen further out, but there still wouldn't be time to custom design and build something to deflect it. There would have to be something in the bull pen ready to go. Preferably something that has been tested a few times.
If you are trying to cross into the US illegally, you have committed a crime. When you are picked up, you are being arrested. In what country are persons being held in jail allowed to have their children with them? (please choose a first world country). The policy of holding the children is a separate facility was a policy put in place during the Obama administration. If was felt that it would be better for the children if they were someplace set up to take care of kids rather than a higher security detention center that wasn't.
The problem of illegal immigration to the US is a big one. Many of the countries to the south haven't had an exemplary past of human rights or opportunities. The US is thought of as a land of gold and it very obviously isn't. It also can't absorb the numbers of uneducated and unskilled people that can't speak English (American) that flood across the borders every year.
There is no perfect solution. The best that can be done is to process people as fast as possible, reunite the families and deport them. People coming across as a family could even get priority. The only positive note with how it's being handled now is that it might be a deterrent.
Anything that is going to work and not just turn an incoming chunk of rock into lots of incoming rocks isn't going to be very useful as a space weapon. Or, it will be less effective than space weapons already in stock.
"How about asteroid impact insurance?"
Given the odds, I think I'll self-insure.
Rock beats proprietary screws. If somebody has the time to unscrew a few screws and twiddle around inside to unlock the lock, the game has already been lost. That's just too fiddly. A good bash or pry will have that lock open without the need for a set of special screwdriver tips.
I had an occasion where a person locked a double gate on the other side and didn't put the lock at the end of each section of chain welded to the gates (again) and I was so pissed (in a hurry and didn't want to spend 10 minutes going around the long way through the other gate) that I gave the gates a big push. Snapped the hasp clean in two. Hmmmm. The mass of the gates coupled with the quality of the chain and welds beat the strength of the lock. We hadn't considered that before. I could have pushed the gates much harder than I did. We could have put a much more expensive lock on the gates, but then it would have been simpler to make a couple of strategic cuts to the chain link fence right next to the gate, peeled it back and driven right in.
Even if you clear a 1km free fire zone, install multiple fences, add tank traps, litter the space with land mines and add guard towers with armed soldiers, determined people will still get through. The cost and inconvenience of the security has to balance with the threat and the value of what's being protected.
"Never fund or support anything on Indidgogo! It is the wild west of crowd funding. So many scams and failed ideas come out of this terrible piece of the internet."
I wouldn't go that far. The Tesla Museum used Indiegogo to raise funds to buy Wardencliff. It's a matter of using common sense. A pad lock with Bluetooth and a fingerprint scanner is just dumb. As it was said in another comment, it's a solution looking for a problem to solve. The price is also ridiculous.
"Chinesium = AvE A Canadian engineer on You Tube,"
Big upvote for AvE. A must view channel. Not only is he hilarious, he's a damn good engineer. My guess is he works in the mining/oil industry. Check out his "engine swap" on a ... err, Ladies' personal massager. Bring spare undies and don't be drinking anything.
The first "Slippery" Jim diGriz mention I've seen on the Reg. Nice one.
You don't need to be a Stainless Steel Rat to circumvent this lock.
The only application I can see is for a gym locker where you don't want to have a bog standard key on you, but that's just being silly. I've never had an issue with my gym locker key and I don't see a $100 lock being a great investment. I expect if I were to lose my key while at the gym, they likely have bolt cutters and I could have a staff member remove my lock and assure themselves that it was my stuff inside via my ID in my wallet or phone combo, etc.
I'd hate to have the battery inside go flat or fail. I'm pretty good about making plenty of key copies and stashing key rings here and there for backup. I have a "water brother" in town with a set of my house keys in case of emergency and I a set of his.
One more fail is if somebody has a look at the lock and decides to screw up the sensor just for fun.
"The US really needs an Official Secrets Act....All this leaking is making the US laughing stock."
It does. It doesn't have a short name but instead a bunch of statute codes. The problem is not that there aren't laws in place, it's how they are applied. I suggest that the higher the person's position, the greater the punishment all the way up to capital punishment. If it could be shown that Ms. Clinton's lack of care with official government secrets while she was Secretary of State lead to deaths that she herself should be subject to the death penalty for treason.
I would argue that what Ed Snowden did was release information that showed a government agency's actions were illegal and in contrary to the tenants of the US Constitution. I concede that it could be argued the other way and the US government is taking that stance. In his case, if he were to bring the information he had to the attention of a superior, he likely would have been disappeared or actively discredited and hounded until he committed suicide.
This is a common problem with people at the top. Some exec wants to bridge an air-gap to sensitive information on the company server so he/she can access it remotely. A power company exec wants to be able to query power plants and grid control equipment remotely. A government flunky with no computer skills creates their own work-around because nobody can teach them "in plain language" how to use the secure system. Since all of these people are at the top, the person they are requiring to do the work can't say no without getting sacked. Never mind that in all of the cases, what they are being asked to do negates all of the security setup work that was done.
Remember when Sony was hacked and several unreleased films were posted online? Power grids have been hacked and in Ms. Clinton's case, it's a near certainty that sensitive government information was release to the wrong people.
The FBI has a whole department dedicated to technical things. If the head of the outfit needed a secure connection between home and work, that would have been a priority. Anybody in a top level position should also understand that, since they don't carry the laptops themselves, they should have one for work and one for personal use and never the two shall mix. The same goes for email. I never used my work email for personal correspondence and didn't use my personal email for work. It's not that hard. It's no more difficult than having separate bank accounts when you are a small businessman.
Perhaps Comey didn't want to go after Hillary since it would have exposed too many of his own indiscretions. I have to wonder if they were known and used against him.
The current tactic with new products these days is to create a buzz, cobble up a prototype, take very dramatic photos and create some virtual videos showing what the product will do when finished and then announce that you are accepting advance deposits to hold a place in line for the first production run. After all of that is done, you finish (or start) the engineering. You don't invite in members of the press for what they believe will be a test drive or to allow them a very close look at the prototype. Some of them may have a built in immunity to Hype. Getting a bunch of deposits should fund the product. If it doesn't, you either do some back filling until more dosh comes in, send everybody their money back with a lame excuse or BK the company and move to Monaco.
"The basic goal of managers in government is to maximise their department's budget and/or headcount."
Taken from "Dogbert's Guide to Management"?
Canada initially came out with some very rational regulations that the USA should have adopted straight away, but himmed and hawed for a couple of more years before finally mostly Xeroxing what Canada did under an FAA seal.
The UK could make life easy on themselves and just make a xerox of a xerox and get on with it. The US system has a mechanism for getting a waiver to go higher or exceeding other regulations on a case by case basis since there will always be outlying applications that are useful. More complex regulations and licensing is under consideration for larger craft and for applications such as crop dusting where the UAS will be out of sight. Simple qualifications for 7kg and under will cover a huge majority of commercial applications and define a clear set of flight rules so idiots will have their toys taken away for doing what idiots always do.
If you are driving down the 5 freeway, you would have to be driving a Tesla. You would need to take the 99 with other brands to use DC fast chargers. I found it sorta funny when looking at fast charging in The Peeples Republik of Kalifornia to see the two main North/South freeways segregated by EV brands.
BTW, the trip is pretty easy with an EV and you can find several YouTube trip videos from people traveling those routes. That said, you would not be required to sell your fuel hog if you were to get an EV for daily use. Moonbeam hasn't unilaterally signed a law that mandates that yet, but he does have some months left before he's out. Bog only knows what silliness he will commit before November.
"Simulations and track testing really don't give adequate data, notably of variations in road signs and markings, the behaviour of other road users, etc."
A test track should have variations in signage and markings to simulate best, average and worst conditions. It would be easy to come up with a suite of tests akin to a friend/foe shooting range that would throw at driving systems the worst situations a cynical old bastard like me can think up.
The DARPA Urban Challenge was conducted on a decommissioned military base in the residential area and that was a superb place to do the testing. It's a great reuse of the facility. A section of houses could even be used to house people and shops during the tests. Balls and replica dogs could be made to dart out into the street. Overhead lines could dangle bicycles along the road that the cars need to detect and avoid. Etc. Etc. Only cars that have passed the torture test should be allowed onto public streets. Type certification for aircraft is very rigorous so that a new model is thoroughly tested before the first paying passenger steps onboard. The same should be required for a mode of transportation that is statistically more dangerous.
"I'm not sticking up for Tesla here, just defining what an "autopilot" actually is. Tesla need to sort that out. They really do."
An aircraft autopilot is just a cruise control with lane keeping assist. The difference is that somebody else (controllers) are watching where the plane is in relation to other aircraft and directing pilots to make course corrections when there are conflicts. There is also a lot more room in the sky lanes. Planes using autopilot are also more likely to be flying IFR so they have had a course plotted that doesn't have them aimed at mountains that they can crash into accidentally.
"If they stopped calling it autopilot it will remove the inappropriate belief that the car becomes self driving."
It's a glorified adaptive cruise control with lane keeping assist. One of it's biggest problems is that it works well enough in many, if not most, average driving situations, but royally screws up from time to time. People get lulled into letting it do too much with too little attention up until the point where it hits the emergency vehicle.
"So Tesla has follow-distance control but no emergency stop? Isn't that becoming standard even on regular cars?"
I hope not. That would be the first thing I'd want to rip out of a new car. Sometimes it's better to stay at the same speed or go faster and maneuver than to slam on the brakes. I don't see any sort of autonomous car being able to make that decision anytime soon.
Organic substances are anything with Carbon as part of their makeup. It's not conclusive evidence of like, past or present. What the finding can do is guide the sorts of sensors and gear that needs to go on a subsequent rover mission so it has a chance of detecting life past or present that would have had a chance on Mars.
Call me a "Red" as I don't think that the possibility of life on Mars should restrict missions to the planet. If there is life there, it doesn't have much of a chance of evolving to the point where it can negotiate for a license to brew and bottle Guinness for the domestic market, my benchmark for sentience.
Honestly, a really exciting announcement would be if life were to be discovered that wasn't based on DNA. That would indicate that life is far more prevalent in the universe than we think. Curiosity doesn't have the kit to find that out, but someday there will be a mission that does.
"I did/do read the adverts in magazines, when I'm actually looking for something - it's one data source"
The trade magazines that I get, I generally skip the editorial content and look through the ads. I see them as perfect targeted ads. They aren't being shoved in my face when I don't have time for them and they tend to be more concise. If something catches my eye, I can visit their website for more information.
"I live in an apartment complex, and they keep the garbage/recycling bins right next to the mailboxes. It makes it very convenient to drop all that crap off."
I had a great business mentor years back that taught me to bin all of the junk mail straight away on the walk back from the mail box. This included any direct mail that I wasn't eager to look at and catalogs for things I don't normally purchase. This has cut down on the mounds of paperwork cluttering up my desk and "in-tray".
I'm not alone is shedding junk mail. The bin at the post office always seems to be very full at the end of every day.
Thank you for doing all of the typing for me.
"2. Seriously cut back on the extent of your sharing data with third parties, and"
Lose the word "sharing". FB is SELLING data they collect to third parties. Surprise, that's how they make money.
"But we don't have anything to hide"
If that's the case, you haven't lived life. I've been drunk at a party before……...
Facebook does not have a responsibility to protect personal information beyond what is mandated by law and has a long record of changing privacy levels without warning. It's a free service to use in exchange for allowing them to sell your information and market products and services to you based on your activities online (everywhere). It that's a problem for you, don't use them. Pick up the phone and call your mom and friends instead. You could even see if you have a pen that works and send them a card for maximum cred.
Oh sure, I can just see officer Donut getting out of his full size SUV to chase a kid on an electric scooter slaloming through pedestrian traffic. Does he/she/It (SF, you never can tell) leave said SUV double parked blocking traffic as chasing takes place?
Looks like a couple of nice Blox modules including a newer Neo M8 GPS board and a stack of Li batteries (18650's?, they look a bit fatter than an 18650)
"I'd suspect if you were the last rider of a missing scooter the company might be coming after you for the replacement cost."
The problem is that they are very lightweight and easily picked up. The last person to officially use one may have properly put the scooter away and then somebody can by and took it away to harvest parts from it to sell. The company would have a hard time trying to collect.
"At the moment they do need to rely on the Russians. This is likely to change quite soon and possibly within the year. In 5 years time it's quite conceivable that it could be the other way around."
Do you mean in 5 years when ISS is likely to be decommissioned?
"Yes, I should have said "manned missions" sorry."
Again, they have.
Look up who created and supports "Creative Commons". It's a joke. If you want to give your stuff away, just post it on a web site with a notice and contact information that you are giving it away. You can also donate your work to the US Library of Congress with an affidavit that puts it immediately into the public domain. You are also welcome to give anybody you like use of your works for no charge while still maintaining your copyright over the work. You do want to know who these people are so you can be sure you get credit and they might even be interested in more of your work or hiring you.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018