I like it too. If you want to be a runner, act like a runner. To me this means, dress like a runner, eat like a runner, and get out of bed and run every day like a runner. When your are educated about what it takes to do something and you match those behaviors, you will be well on your way to being exactly that... And when you are actually doing those behaviors, there isn't any more pretending.
But that's actually a bad idea in many cases. If a severely out of shape person decides to act like a runner by running everyday, he is very likely to hurt himself relatively quickly or need physical therapy, especially if he is overweight.
Only on the outside. On the inside, excluding the touchscreen the interior of the Tesla 3 (and really, all Teslas excluding the original Roadsters) has more in common with a Yaris or 90s era Kia then a Model 3 or entry-level Lexus.
For people with multiple cars, it's not much of an issue for things to be just a little off (the plastic, the handles, the seat fabrics, steering wheel alignment, shavings on the dash board, etc.)--the Tesla is a show car and treated as such. For people who would use the Model 3 as their primary vehicle, the experience is subpar for its current price point compared to all other vehicles in its class (entry level luxury vehicles) or engine type (other EVs) and this is one of the difficulties Tesla will run into once it actually starts public shipments of the car. There's enough competition out there now that being an electric isn't enough to justify a premium price; the car has to have premium interiors as well.
Source: my boss has all of them. I ride shotgun quite frequently.
I hear this argument against Tesla all the time (disclaimer: I own a Model S). I used to own a BMW 3 series and an X5. Tesla, IMHO, is a far superior car. Interior materials is just one aspect of the car. But a car is a complete package. And Tesla overall gives you much more - an infotainment system that is 100x better than an awful BMW iDrive (or my Hyundais system), monthly software updates, no dealership model, constantly improving autopilot systems, an amazing supercharger network, minimal options package (BMW will charge you for LED lights on 7series), free LTE, free Supercharging (atleast for me), a minimalist interior, huge cabin space etc. etc. I would take a Tesla Model S any day over a 7 series or S class. And a Model 3 any day over a BMW 3 series. A 328i is a 4 cylinder underpowered vehicle that comes with a manual parking brake, a tiny screen, and hundreds of useless controls. Then you have to buy a million option to make the car half decent. And my 335i would break down every other month.
Yes, this is exactly right. I was astonished the first couple times I rode in a Tesla at how downmarket the interiors feel compared to your middle of the road German luxury cars like a BMW 3-series or equivalent.
I think you're wildly overestimating the sophistication of car buyers.
Luxury car buyers, fundamentally, are buying the logo, and the handful of obviously markers inside the car that tell people it's a Lexus or whatever. They aren't buying fit and finish, even if they think they are. Tesla buyers are no different: they want a Tesla, not a Lexus or a Mercedes.
I'm sure to the trained eye a Lexus has a different build than a Tesla, just as cheeses and wines are different. That's not what drives sales.
I don't think you're taking into consideration what people want out of a commuter car. The Model 3 isn't targeting luxury buyers anymore--it's targeting upper middle class drivers looking for a commuter car that will function as their primary day-to-day vehicle.
They want comfort, first and foremost. A Tesla nameplate means nothing on your daily commuter car if it's not pleasant to drive. A Lexus or a Mercedes, even at the entry level, provides a comfortable ride. The interiors feel luxurious. A Tesla does not. And that's the problem--it charges an entry-level luxury price but doesn't provide an entry-level luxury ride. Subjectively, I find that the Tesla's interiors aren't even as comfortable as the Bolt, and I'm not even including the many QC issues they have in that assessment.
The Tesla name might bring potential buyers to the dealership, but when you're targeting a road warrior, the interior is what sells the car.
I dunno. I mean, I want a Tesla (a little) and I don't want a Lexus or Mercedes in particular. I think you're overgeneralizing. Markets are big, the "people" in your first sentence aren't the same population for Tesla buyers and Lexus buyers.
There are plenty of instances where I might want directions while I'm on a run, but there is no way I'm paying $10 a month to add the device to my plan. Hopefully it is just shared data with my phone plan. We'll see what the carriers do, but I think it will make or break it for a lot of people.
If it ends up compatible with project fi, their extra data-only device comes free (at $10/GB like the rest of the plan). Might make this the first smart watch I've found appealing.
The problem with that is that it would have to be completely decoupled from your phone since Project Fi only supports the Pixel and Apple Watch only supports iOS.
If you don't want the watch to interact with your phone at all, then you would be fine. But you'd presumably be losing quite a bit of functionality by doing so.
Exactly. £10 per month (no contract) was probably the average spend then (for approx. 40mins calling and 300 SMS). Now I'm paying £60 per month for 2 years and it seems normal. An extra £10 per month to use your plan with up to 3 devices will be the norm in another couple of years.
The problem is that gave me something I wanted: the internet everywhere.
This gives me something I've been living without and don't want to pay that much for then privilege of: my smart watch working when I don't have my phone.
I would really like to see the names of people who are working on the research. They reference other papers and give their authors credit, but was disappointed to not see the Apple employees get credit.
On the pro side, Trump can say he followed through with a campaign promise. The accord was non-binding self-enforced, so from a day-to-day business impact, not much changes from regular Trump policy setting. On the con side, foreign relations will be stressed and global climate policy will be set without US corporate input (possibly a good thing?).
No, the profit after all investment costs is thin and may depend on accounting, but the car production itself produces the money they are investing into e.g. the Gigafactory.
Tesla sold stock several times to fund the Gigafactory. Then they got Panasonic to pay for half of the Gigafactory.
That's not from profits, that's from shareholder investments. Its the power of the stock market to dump money into an asset. But don't pretend that Tesla managed to scrap together like $3 Billion from their years of operating losses.
Sitting on a jury yourself should alleviate you from worries about jurors not being experts themselves. Jurors are not experts in law, yet every case they sit on the lawyers bring in people to educate the jurors on the law and all aspects that pertain to a case. It is incredibly educational sitting on a jury.
Jurors are not expected to actually learn anything about the law. In fact they are told that they are not deciding or interpreting the law. Juries are finders of facts and the relevant law snippets and their interpretations are given to them by the judge. (Actually if I recall correctly, my jury wasn't even given the actual law text excerpts. Just the plaintext interpretation of them.)
It can be interesting going through the process as a juror but I didn't find that I learned much about the law as a result.
> Jurors are not expected to actually learn anything about the law
Since jury instructions both ask for a determination of whether a particular legal standard was met (phrased in legal terms), and explanation of what facts (in lay terms) the jury must find to say that that standard was met, I think your statement is not completely accurate.
I had a similar experience. After jury selection, the trial seemed to start almost immediately and I was surprised that we were not given more background information or preparation before opening statements started. During the trial I felt like there was a lot of pressure to not ask any questions or ask for any clarifications. Even when the jury asked for a repeat of the definition of reasonable doubt, the request had to be talked about by the lawyers and the judge. Then during deliberation, we had to ask permission to view different pieces of evidence, which generally added friction to the process.
