Re:European Teslas to have built-in Rdio
by timdorr on Friday February 07, 2014 @11:46AM
(#7197189)
Have you used the Tesla music system before? I use Slacker extensively in the car, and it's entirely skinned to match the car interface. I have no commercials or ads in my streams and the only branding is a small logo in the corner of the music display (which I don't have to have on screen to use). It's not an "app" in the typical sense, just a service that powers the music player.
I would expect it to operate much the same way with Rdio. You'd buy the ad-free plan ($9.99/mo vs $3.99/mo for Slacker) and get the same experience.
Re:European Teslas to have built-in Rdio
by jamesbritt on Saturday February 08, 2014 @01:27AM
(#7200494)
Rather than downvote, perhaps someone could answer the questions. I'm genuinely curious how things are set up in a Tesla. I've not used one so I don't know what options are provided.
Weird that asking how something works pisses people off.
Re:European Teslas to have built-in Rdio
by revelation on Friday February 07, 2014 @12:27PM
(#7197446)
Theres no 'Rdio App' in the car, it's just another provider in the music library (along there with your phone or USB stick), and it uses the normal controls and interface.
Re:European Teslas to have built-in Rdio
by dylandrop on Friday February 07, 2014 @11:57AM
(#7197260)
Will they fix the problem? Certainly not. Are they a step in the right direction? Almost certainly yes.
The main problem with cars I see is that they're inefficient as opposed to mass transport (as Rees seems to suggest in the first article). Additionally, by suggesting that they are the solution, this creates a false sense of security in people having "done their part" to save the planet. For example, if I recycle, that's good, but it hardly means I've eliminated my carbon footprint.
However, where I disagree is that I believe developing these technologies -- engines that can run more efficiently on electricity -- are inherently useful to us building a more sustainable future. If we're able to build electric tractors, boats, ambulances, ATVs, etc. built on top of this technology, then that is no doubt useful.
Re:European Teslas to have built-in Rdio
by valtih1978 on Friday February 07, 2014 @01:57PM
(#7198009)
I had to come up with the aspect of sustainablity because it is of utmost importantance in the postoil we have entered whereas it remains outside the mainstream, as opposed with the topic (the electric car), which are deceptevly sold as a synonym of sustainablility, whereas it is opposite because of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox
There is also one problem with your recycling analogy. Recycling is always a good thing (after Reduce and Reuse, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waste_hierarchy#How_the_hierar..., of course), no matter what. But, relaying on automobiles is not. The automobile is the source of evil - itproduces antisustaibale environment, aka "urban sprawl" www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPS1y81b1Bw
Re:European Teslas to have built-in Rdio
by dylandrop on Friday February 07, 2014 @03:15PM
(#7198443)
You could make the same argument about recycling. Making unnecessary packaging is a source of evil, in that it uses tons of unnecessary energy and resources. Recycling makes this system incrementally better. Additionally, recycling in some cases uses more carbon than it saves (through transportation, processing, etc.) -- I've heard this figure in relation to NYC's recycling program, in particular (although I don't have a source offhand).
I see what you mean about the idea of efficiency vs. consumption (Jevon's Paradox), although this still ignores the idea that certain automobiles will continue to be used (such as ambulances, construction vehicles, etc. as I mentioned before), and also ignores resources should be eventually used in as much of a closed loop as possible (i.e. solar power to charge your Tesla). For the time being, we don't have the infrastructure to support solely public transportation, so in the meantime it is reasonable to use electric vehicles.
Re:European Teslas to have built-in Rdio
by valtih1978 on Saturday February 08, 2014 @03:46AM
(#7200710)
> For the time being, we don't have the infrastructure to support solely public transportation, so in the meantime it is reasonable to use electric vehicles.
You put everything upside down. You do not have the efficient infrastructure _because of automobiles_ and, by representing automobiles as something recycled, your perpetuate this wasteful infrastructure.
Re:European Teslas to have built-in Rdio
by toomuchtodo on Friday February 07, 2014 @02:07PM
(#7198076)
"Sprawl" is sustainable when materials are recycled in a closed loop (as aluminum is close to being) and energy is sourced from clean, renewable sources.
Re:European Teslas to have built-in Rdio
by r00fus on Friday February 07, 2014 @12:44PM
(#7197561)
Why do you sensationalize the linked article title?
Personally, I'd prefer an electric car because it's more efficient, better torque, and no evaporative emissions. The environmental angle is just another benefit. All the same concern trolling was hashed out 8-10 years ago when Prius hit the mainstream.
I would expect it to operate much the same way with Rdio. You'd buy the ad-free plan ($9.99/mo vs $3.99/mo for Slacker) and get the same experience.
No. Can you install your preferred streaming music sources, such as Grooveshark or Pandora or Last.fm?
Can you remove all signs of Slacker if you decide you don't want to be bothered with it?
Weird that asking how something works pisses people off.
That's how Slacker support works, anyway.
I am very in consent with the outrage that William Rees dares to disseminate http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugv0OY6LyuE#t=450
The main problem with cars I see is that they're inefficient as opposed to mass transport (as Rees seems to suggest in the first article). Additionally, by suggesting that they are the solution, this creates a false sense of security in people having "done their part" to save the planet. For example, if I recycle, that's good, but it hardly means I've eliminated my carbon footprint.
However, where I disagree is that I believe developing these technologies -- engines that can run more efficiently on electricity -- are inherently useful to us building a more sustainable future. If we're able to build electric tractors, boats, ambulances, ATVs, etc. built on top of this technology, then that is no doubt useful.
There is also one problem with your recycling analogy. Recycling is always a good thing (after Reduce and Reuse, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waste_hierarchy#How_the_hierar..., of course), no matter what. But, relaying on automobiles is not. The automobile is the source of evil - itproduces antisustaibale environment, aka "urban sprawl" www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPS1y81b1Bw
I see what you mean about the idea of efficiency vs. consumption (Jevon's Paradox), although this still ignores the idea that certain automobiles will continue to be used (such as ambulances, construction vehicles, etc. as I mentioned before), and also ignores resources should be eventually used in as much of a closed loop as possible (i.e. solar power to charge your Tesla). For the time being, we don't have the infrastructure to support solely public transportation, so in the meantime it is reasonable to use electric vehicles.
You put everything upside down. You do not have the efficient infrastructure _because of automobiles_ and, by representing automobiles as something recycled, your perpetuate this wasteful infrastructure.
Personally, I'd prefer an electric car because it's more efficient, better torque, and no evaporative emissions. The environmental angle is just another benefit. All the same concern trolling was hashed out 8-10 years ago when Prius hit the mainstream.