If you have common ICE car, it is very inexpensive to keep it running when you can wrench yourself. I spent less than $600 in 15 years and 160k miles for all parts to repair 2005 Malibu. I had to go to dealer once, because ABS control module is locked. You need dealer codes and 'programming'. $240 for 15 minutes work.
For 2005 Malibu:
Oxygen sensors: one is $19, still running on originals.
Catalytic Converters: one side Carb Compliant $319, still running on originals
Spark plugs: Iridium NGK 6*$5, took me 1 hour to replace
Thermostat: $4 + $3 shipping, 15 minutes to replace
That's equivalent to replacing an ICE engine/transmission, how often does that happen, and how much does that cost? It's a moot point, ICE cars lose that one by default.
Secondly, it's not just the pure monetary value. We have four cars in a family of six, and despite my brother being good with the wrench, ICE manufacturers have made it incredibly time consuming and difficult to do even the most basic maintenance work outside of maybe oil changes and brake pads. HUGE dealership service costs are practically unavoidable with modern ICE cars despite improvements in reliability to previous eras. The peace of mind and reliability gained from having fewer mechanical problems is invaluable. I'm gladly willing to pay MORE for electric cars in their current state to not have to deal with dealerships and mechanics. They're only going to get better.
Thirdly, I've been in the market for a new car for the past year. Driving assistance on motorways and London like traffic where you spend hours daily are a huge help. Virtually every viable option right now is a baby compared to Tesla's autopilot. Although this could be improved upon, I have no trust in ICE manufacturers to make any meaningful strides to catch up anytime soon. They're still figuring out android auto (which is a must because their proprietary tech is equivalent to a kick in the balls). The new kid on the block is just doing it better.
Lastly, a decade-ish old company/tech here warrants serious discussion in its CURRENT state compared to giants that are decades old, and they have no answer so far. ICE Vs electric is a forgone conclusion at this point, but I wish other manufacturers catch up to the trend sooner rather than later because that's ultimately better for us consumers. I'm not a fan of Tesla's Apple like views on product ownership in regards to repairs etc. But sadly, their current offering is far better than competition so we have no choice.
You missed my point completely. The comment I responded to cherry-picked a large list of items that didn't apply to electric cars, so I cherry-picked an example that didn't apply to ICE cars. Neither example is really relevant to the point I started with, which is that Tesla in particular is locking you into their repair centers in a way that is new to the car industry.
I like my Model 3 pretty well, but maintenance cost is a losing argument at this point, still. So far, the real world numbers show that Teslas cost more to maintain than a similar ICE car. It may eventually be true that the simplicity of an EV means lower maintenance costs, but we are not their yet.
You absorb the heavy metals and other harmful components that the deer have been absorbing by drinking landfill leakage, which is kinda not good for your body.
Should that be something to arrest someone for, though?
I’ve seen his bizarre case being used by the far right as an example of why they’re correct and various conspiracies are against them.
And let’s be real, being afraid of a pug to the point you arrest someone? Come on. The government caring about stuff like that is taking the Streisand effect to new levels. It’s even more bizarre when supporters of those laws condemn China. It’s the same policy, just different politics.
The fax protocol includes a strong "read receipt" type mechanism that the machines can't ignore. "Did you get the last page?" "Yes, no bad lines."
Legally, this is interesting because it doesn't exist in email. You had the machines agree that the complete document was sent and was received. You will certainly find that it other transfer protocols, but not email, where the machines don't talk to each other directly.
To be honest, I would treat them as a wishlist. If you've got a solid handle on at least some of the requirements, it literally won't hurt to apply.
More often than not, those job requirements are not written by the person who is doing the hiring, or the people you will be working with. Just be honest about what you know, what areas you are willing to grow in, and what excites you about the job position.
Some companies "hire only the best". A good company for a junior developer will look for a person's "trajectory"- i.e. is a person willing and worth investing in to help them grow.
Because the end of the last ice age was only 12,000 years ago; and in that time frame, if that warming was caused by a prehistoric civilization, there would be a ton of evidence for that civilization's existence.
UPS drivers are all about timing. They know precisely what they can carry, and what amount of time it will take them to manage the packages, with or without the awesome heavy-duty UPS convertible hand truck.
Partly because they are trained and know their craft - but mostly because they are correctly paid, and so they are almost always long-term workers with learned expertise at driving and delivering.
(As opposed to the Atlantic writer, who did the job for a day, didn't know how to do it correctly, found it difficult, and whined about it. That's not actually telling us much of anything, when you think about it.)
That would just be monogamy. The thing people are calling stupid is the idea that low status men should be assigned wives forcefully to prevent them from being sad, which is what some people have actually proposed.
False. That's how how was (deliberately?) misinterpreted. But "enforced monogamy" is a term used in e.g. evolutionary biology to describe, basically, just a societal norm of monogamy, maybe enforced by law (polygamy is illegal in most places). No-one's suggesting forcing women to marry someone.
> No-one's suggesting forcing women to marry someone.
The "incel" community frequently calls for the state to provide partners to incels. They point to how in the Netherlands, the disabled have access to sex worker services, subsidized by the state. They claim that their inability to find sexual partners is comparable to a disability, and therefore the state should help.
Then, some portion of those incels believe that men should be able to expect that their sexual partners do not have any other partners, so suddenly this turns into believing that the state should provide incels a monogamous, long-term partner, essentially a wife.
By definition sex workers are the opposite of monogamy.
Also what are you objecting to here? Prostitution in general? Having it subsidized by the state?
This argument:
> They point to how in the Netherlands, the disabled have access to sex worker services, subsidized by the state. They claim that their inability to find sexual partners is comparable to a disability, and therefore the state should help.
This is not absurd. In the Netherlands prostitution is legal, anyone can buy the services of a sex worker. I don't know if it's true that the state subsidizes it for disabled people. If they do I imagine the idea is that having sex is an right and if you can't get it on your own (by either for free or by paying it) the state should supply it. Extending it to incels is not a huge leap.
But this is an extreme and absurd postition from a small group. It's not reasonable that people attribute this to Peterson. I would agree that he could've seen this coming, and could have clarified what he means from the start, rather than after the controversy.
He is purposefully obtuse. This way, hard core incels can believe he means the more extreme options, medium believers believe he means wherever positions they fall on the spectrum, and he has plausible deniability for journalists.
I don't think so. The problem is you have to be aware of other things he's saying to get at the correct, more charitable, interpretation. Namely, he's calling on people not to blame others or society at large for their problems, but to improve their own life and become a desirable potential mate. That's opposite of what he's accused of.
> Namely, he's calling on people not to blame others or society at large for their problems, but to improve their own life and become a desirable potential mate.
When Peterson calls on males to improve themselves, a substantial portion of his audience hears this as an exhortation to stop bitching and moaning, get off their asses... and then learn seduction techniques, push for political changes that would guarantee them a mate, or other steps that might be considered coercive or antisocial. Regardless of Peterson’s own position, never underestimate the ability of his statements to be interpreted in various fashions due to the seething anger of some of his listeners.
Dunno, seems like what we can label as "incels" (outside tiny violent group that pushed this term to mainstream) could now easily represent 50% of single male population. That's pretty bad for society. Look at Japan what is happening there. Or into China where planned male overpopulation is causing massive problems in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos (stealing women) and they don't do the usual way of curbing excess males by the means of war, like practiced in the Middle East.
The thing that confuses me about this explanation: we already do that. So it doesn't make much sense as a proposed solution to a supposedly new problem.
It seems plausible to me that the new problem (men without partners) is in part due to weakened social as well as legal norms around marriage, but via divorce rather than polygamy. In my opinion that doesn't mean we should go back to the old ways, but it's worth being aware of the connection.
Let's be fair here, no one really cares about them being 'sad', the trouble is that having a lot of sexually frustrated young men around isn't going to help the stability of your society.
Which isn't to say that the way we dealt with this in the past, which was keeping women out of the work force and making them dependent on men for survival and status, is something we should go back to, just that there are consequences we'll have to recognize and deal with somehow.
That’s not the only way that monogamy can be enforced. For example, in many countries, sex outside of marriage is illegal with severe penalties, and divorce and adultery are either illegal or lead to social ostracism. These countries don’t assign anyone a spouse but they have very high rates of early marriage and low rates of divorce (even in abusive marriages) because of you want to have sex, which most people do, you need to get married.
It's pretty clear that TC is alluding to Jordan Peterson. When I read the enforced monogamy headline I thought that's an incredibly stupid thing for him to say, only to find out that (surprise, surprise) it was taken out of context. What he actually said can still be criticized, but isn't even worth a headline.
Replacing an oxygen sensor – $249 - Teslas don't have these
Replacing a catalytic converter – $1,153 - Teslas don't have these
Replacing ignition coil(s) and spark plug(s) – $390 - Teslas don't have these
Tightening or replacing a fuel cap – $15 - Teslas have a charging port cover, and it breaks
Thermostat replacement – $210 - Teslas don't have these (in engines)
Replacing ignition coil(s) – $236 - Teslas don't have these
Mass air flow sensor replacement – $382 - Teslas don't have these
Replacing spark plug wire(s) and spark plug(s) – $331 - Teslas don't have these
Replacing evaporative emissions (EVAP) purge control valve – $168 - Teslas don't have these
Replacing evaporate emissions (EVAP) purging solenoid – $184 - Teslas don't have these