themistocle

> Leaf goes from point A to B for a modest subset of points

That could be great for some people, but for more people a 10-year old Toyota Corolla would also be great. That's the problem, there isn't a compelling reason beyond interest in new technology or eco-sensibility to buy one of these cars.

The article is about US Electric Car Sales, US gas prices are therefore assumed.

No need for me to quibble with your sentiment. The question is: if they don't solve a problem, why buy one? Prius offered people clean hands, and not much more. When gas is cheap the price of fuel isn't a big motivator, and Detroit is happy to churn out SUVs. So unless the state changes current market conditions I see no reason why people would choose to buy these electric cars.

The only people I know who have an electric car own or have pre-ordered Teslas. They are all status symbols. I don’t know anyone who needs an electric car. Maybe the problem is just as much lack of demand as it is lack of big auto commitment?

> I am certainly all for investing in retraining programs; hell perhaps even having a rural specific health insurance system.

> But increasing tariffs to protect coal miners? Killing solar and renewables for the sake of those communities? That is not a tradeoff I want to make.

What you've said in general makes sense. I'm only responding to point out that the question isn't just rural people and coal miners. Cities, suburbs, and towns are also affected. A few economic centers are doing well while _everywhere else_ is not.

Automation and the changing economy threaten the vast majority of Americans. Technical jobs will increasingly become critical, and tech workers can organize together to gain significant influence. If we don't, it will be up to the "masters of the universe" – Zuckerberg, et al. This industry is transforming politics, society, and culture. My hope is that we technicians take our role seriously.

> why are these failing communities "America" any more than the metro regions are

They aren't. They do represent more of the population and land area. Also many cities, probably most, are awful. Memphis, TN or Dayton, OH are much more representative of the nation then New York or San Francisco.

> Why should the rest of us be heavily taxed and regulated just to preserve these anachronistic, unproductive communities?

That really hasn't been a question in this discussion. The international order is built on nation-states. Whether you like it or not, the nation implies collective responsibility. This was the "fraternité" part of the French revolution, for example. Your remarks reflect the prevailing liberal sentiments that we are all just individuals. If we are these atomic subjects, why should we be obligated to help some random other atoms? This is one of the reasons why liberal democracies are failing. The left and establishment have no good response to this. The alt-right has pushed people to revive ethnic (Richard Spencer) or civic (Steve Bannon) nationalism.

Secretary didn't go away. Hot-type printing is a better example. Look at how healthy and well-performing the economy is doing. Real wages stagnating for almost fifty years, speculation enriching the gamblers. Millions of people have already given up finding work. Whole communities have become drug-infested hellholes. America is falling apart. Visit these towns where industry is obsolete or shipped abroad. Look at that, and then say "yep, accelerating this process will be wonderful".

What I referred to as high school economics are sentimental rhetoric like:

> Who is automation for? All of us

Your arguments have largely been innocent either by design or accident from the terrifying reality of daily life under our glorious economic system. I meant no personal insult to you of course. Your words reflect a broader notion that questions like automation are problems to be solved – a fine mindset from a technical perspective. But these are not just technical questions, they are grave conflicts where millions of lives hang in the balance. Slate Star Codex has a better exposition of this difference[0].

> Think of where we would be if Tesla, Edison and Westinghouse refused to work on electricity, lightbulbs, and electric motors because it would put the people that stoke fires for a living out of a job.

This is nearly identical to the plot from Ayn Rand's book "Anthem"[1].

[0]: http://slatestarcodex.com/2018/01/24/conflict-vs-mistake/ [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthem_(novella)

> The next day he presents his work to the World Council of Scholars. Horrified that he has done unauthorized research, they assail him as a "wretch" and a "gutter cleaner" and say he must be punished. They want to destroy his discovery so it will not disrupt the plans of the World Council and the Department of Candles.

> What happened when tractors came and took all of the farming jobs away?

Have you heard of “The Grapes of Wrath”?

No one is talking about fighting “innovation” for the sake of jobs. I questioned to point to the central conflict of who benefits from all of this. The old socialists were the most technologically hopeful, because they believed new technologies would spare workers from drudgery. Yet if you look at the vast interior of the United States, almost every community is worse off now than it was 25 years ago. Old, bad jobs at least gave people dignity and a sense of place.

Your naïve faith in high school economics fails to address a key question of our times: as technology races ahead of social ability to adapt and integrate it, how will people manage? Leave behind Ayn Rand and look to history: this same crisis has played out in the 1st century BCE in Rome and the 18th century in France just to name two famous examples. Depriving common people a decent living leads to disaster.

People need to make a living. Immigration alone has provoked widespread resentment. When self-driving cars and the like displace more workers at an unprecedented pace the outcome will be violent. Rhetoric and greed will not stem the high tides of blood.

A decent way of life and some semblance of culture.

Who is automation for? What end does the technology serve? If the economy doesn’t serve humanity then to hell with it. Offer people decent lives, or at least don’t act surprised when the luddites come to smash your precious “labor-saving”.

Who would have known or even cared were it not for this denounciation?

This extreme rhetoric only strengthens the right. By condemning Nye for debating creationists and being a “combative white nerd”, this article reads like the Onion. Attending this event may be bad idea, but with friends like these who needs enemies? Who wants to even try and take part in public life? The moment you stand up you’ll be marked next for the pillory. Do we really wonder why liberal democracy is collapsing?

And to think that ZFS for FreeBSD had already been up and running for years...

> We find that doxing victims in our data set are overwhelmingly male, have an average age in their 20s, and a significant number are part of gamer communities (or maintain accounts with multiple video-game related websites). We also find that most doxes include highly identifying information of the victim and family members, such as full legal names, phone numbers and online social networking accounts.

I hope someone uses this research as a starting point for an investigation of why gamers are so heavily doxed. Might help us predict and prevent more doxing in the future.

You seem intelligent and I don’t mean this as an insult, but I think you’re missing the point.

To use an inexact metaphor, if I am selling gas no one is obligated to fill up at my station. Fuel efficient cars are not “robbing” me. People who take public transit are not ripping me off. My job as a businessman is to make money. Consumers owe nothing to me. If the gas I sell is leaded and no one wants to buy it, I have no right to complain.

If I cut out every ad from my copy of the yellow pages no one has a right to complain. Adblocking is no different.

Advertising has to wake up.

Individual choices are insignificant. The future of advertising is being planned by Facebook and Google. Blocking advertisments is a workaround for a broken web. Surfing the web has always been about discovery. Are we supposed to intuit whether or not to visit a site for the first time based on how we predict it will align to some kind of ad rubric? The fact that many websites have bad business models is noone’s fault but their own. In fact, tools like AdNauseum[0] show how broken this moralistic consumer thinking is:

Block all ads?

> That’s robbing sites of needed advertising click-dollars!

Click all ads?

> That’s robbing advertising companies of needed attention!

This is totalitarian capitalism: it’s not good enough to accept being tracked everywhere, spied on, and burdened with processing advertising. Not good enough even to click every ad. You must love the ads in your heart. It’s your duty, citizen!

0. https://adnauseam.io/

Wow, I never knew that. Reminds me of some recent moves to prevent skipping ads on streaming video.

When reading we’re free to skip and skim. Vinyl, VHS, Cassette, CD, and DVD allow us to seek or rewind as we like. When I buy a PC, I can install any software I choose to. When browsing the web, I can accept or reject any served content.

That’s not entitlement. Entitlement is the sentiment that users somehow owe advertising or web firms anything.

I’m afraid that the current environment means outcry is always around the corner. I’m rooting for Mozilla but I’d like it if they could learn to avoid drawing negative attention.

Yeah I actually used it from a public WiFi and then ran outside to meet the driver when he got close enough.

Yeah my intention was just to share that I found it easier. In my case the map wasn’t working. I was on a public WiFi hotspot and I didn’t know where or how to hail a cab. I’m sure it is technically possible to do without the convenience, but doing all the communication over the app in advance saved me from walking four hours in the rain and likely getting lost.

Mozilla is fighting an uphill battle, but that doesn't give them a free pass. The Pocket, Cliqz, and Mr. Robot controversies undermine Mozilla's core message. Whether or not they are simply failures of marketing and branding doesn't change the fact that they hurt the company. That being said, a lot of people will never know about these issues so the damage is not catastrophic.

I would also argue that "just being better than X" was shown not to be effective in the last US Presidential election.

I could, but sometimes addresses are not so clear. In my experience taxi drivers like it when you can explain directions and negotiate price. Without common language for me that is quite difficult.

Not having mobile data in my case meant that I was scrambling from public wifi to the cab. I could not use Google translate or other tools in the car. I also would have no way to negotiate price or insure that I was going the correct place. Not saying that Uber is the only way, but that for me it was helpful.

Those are interesting techniques. In my case I was in a foreign country and did not have a map or hotel reservation. I also did not know about local taxi companies. My visit was not exactly well-planned.

I am not sure how you were able to communicate if you could not write or speak directions, but I am impressed! I don't think it wasn't possible to do before Uber in general, just for my case.

I traveled recently in a foreign country where I did not speak the local language. Uber allowed me to enter my destination and location without confusing the driver. I could never have done this with a traditional taxi cab.