I have one of those hurtful abusive mothers and I can see that OP was just being nice, repaying a kindness he felt 6yrs ago like he said. You are being sensitive of you can't see that.
Do you own products from companies that take part in illegal, corrupt, or morally questionable acts? My point is not to shame you, my point is to say what Tesla does is just not close to the behavior of traditional car companies, oil companies, or many Chinese manufacturers that make your favorite gadgets. It's just that Elon is a twat at times because he is obviously emotionally unstable.
Not that I’m aware of, but I’m sure I do in some cases. I try, and I’m a vegetarian because of view of factory farming for example.
Maybe Tesla is no worse or better than the other companies. That’s one issue for me, but there is another. He doesn’t appear to be in control of himself. It leaves me with very little confidence in a company that I would be spending ~70k on their product with the expectation of high quality, and good support for 5-10 years.
It beats doing nothing at all, and using some of the things you cite (oil, made in China) is close to impossible to avoid (for now at least), but that doesn’t preclude anyone from saying they disapprove of Tesla and won’t buy one of their car because of what they think of the ceo. Especially when the ceo is the brand.
I thought the point of the free market was to send signals about what factories should be built with your purchasing choices, not to limit your purchasing choices to whoever has the biggest factory today?
So me buying a non-Tesla electric car will have much the same effect as buying a Tesla with regard to the future of personal transportation? Regardless of how many cars the other manufacturer is currently producing?
I wonder what signal I’m sending by not owning a car…
> So me buying a non-Tesla electric car will have much the same effect as buying a Tesla with regard to the future of personal transportation? Regardless of how many cars the other manufacturer is currently producing?
Back then I had an old SPARCstation as a second computer with Debian, running INN (a Usenet news server) and Exim (mail server), both fed by UUCP over TCP.
That was long after UUCP was used seriously, but a few hobbyists still used it for fun.
Batches arrived, were decompressed and fed into Exim and INN.
That day (and the following days), batches were not decompressed before the next ones arrived. System load was through the roof.
I had never implemented or even thought about real load handling and queuing, because why should I? My few hundred kilobytes (or maybe a megabyte?) of mails and news every half hour were decompressed pretty much instantly. Until that day.
I was working for a small non-profit focused on youth voting. I was working out of the Americorps/CityYear office in Philly that morning. My dad was the Director of IT for a major University.
It was pretty early in the morning when it hit. And it hit fast. I received I Love You emails, but knew something was up. Called my dad and shit was hitting the fan there and he gave me a heads up what was happening. While I was on the phone with him, the office I was in started having alot of commotion as it started going through their inboxes.
I don't remember there being much actual damage, but it was stunning how fast and widespread it was. It's one of those days you look back on and remember as a day the internet changed.
Because they know that the worse the crisis gets, the harsher the economical consequences for China will be.
Countries and citizens remember where the virus comes from, like they do for SARS and it they will put pressure on their governments to move production elsewhere.
I think China will be "punished" anyways, regardless when this crisis ends. There's no way globalization will continue in the future, governments will force companies to move production of essential supplies (food, medicine, raw materials) back locally to make their economies resilient to similar shocks in the future.
Fortunately, for China, the country is starting to have enough local consumption that it probably doesn't need to be just an export hub any more (but undoubtedly it will hurt).
Edit: this will, I predict, hurt Western companies & shareholders as well. I expect many companies to be much more rigorously stress-tested for supply chain and/or labour issues, similar to how banks are stress-tested for credit issues. This will mean thinner margins, lower profits.
Obviously, which is why I'm guessing it will be centrally enforced (laws by governments). Not for companies like Uber or Netflix, but whatever is consider "essential" (medicine, energy, food, raw metals, ...).
Frankly I'm on the side that the Chinese are acting in good faith here. They have every motivation to do so. Stamping out the virus worldwide is for them a first order national priority.
It’s not necessarily an act of charity. China has a vested interest in looking like the country capable of leading the world out of the pandemic, especially as Trump continues to stumble and alienate the rest of the world - it’s the same game of politics that all countries play all the time.
Crises are how rising powers become dominant powers - WW2 was the crisis that propelled America past UK to become the worlds dominant power.
Not sure. Probably networking/distributed systems textbooks or network/telco hardware docs prior to 2000-2003. That was the conventional wisdom back then. Dig around in IEEE and ACM articles of the period and you will find lot of commentary about the broadcast/scaling issues.
Back then Data Centers didn't exist as they do today. Most large system architects didn't believe emerging new startups like Twitter/Facebook/YouTube etc would survive because the scaling problem, that many to many broadcast required, hadn't been cracked yet.
There was only email and IM back then and no one was broadcasting to millions of people every 2 mins. Because it would just crash everything.
That's why large companies at the time like Yahoo, Google and Microsoft etc totally missed the social media boat. They didn't believe it would work and were already running into scaling issues with their own systems.
It mostly all luck that it worked out. Telcos worldwide upgraded pipes and Moore's law drastically dropped cost of processing exactly around that period making data centers/cloud possible. And all of a sudden we are in a new world were many to many mass broadcasting is a reality.
Beyond the CS side to this recommended reading would be Howard Simon's concept of Bounded Rationality, it's implications, work arounds etc. It's based on studying large orgs and how they fail when human cognitive limitations get hit.
That kind of approach probably needs to be scaled up/developed to handle the broadcast issue.
With everyone broadcasting it's easy to hit mental bandwidth limits. And then mistakes start happening. People react to each others mistakes, hide them etc. Fixing thing get more and more complicated and then you have a runaway cascade. It becomes a trap.
As a ham radio operator, I can tell you that it’s completely ok to allow everyone to broadcast if there is a small system of common sense rules in place that determines when to send and when to wait.
I follow the same minamalist lifestyle. I have a bin with my summer clothes. I'll switch them out soon for the winter ones. Even still it's very few items overall. I used to have 100s of pieces of clothing.
