I own two Volvos and I can tell you that with the new insanely complicated engines no mechanic will touch the car. You will be stuck servicing it at Volvo dealership at lawyers hourly rates. And this will be aggravated by the fact that with more moving parts the car will break more often. Plus the cost of the new engine is much higher. The base price of the 2016 XC90 with the new engine is well above what the previous model cost. The fuel efficiency savings are unlikely to come close to offsetting the increased cost of ownership.
It seems that Volvo adopted the "differentiation" strategy of some hardware manufacturers - needlessly boosting the specs which looks good on paper but doesn't do squat for the end user.
In my opinion it's move in the wrong direction for Volvo that used be known for it's simplicity.
I would disagree with you there. Yes there is something to be said for simplicity, however advancement often comes with complexity.
I think the engineering model is going to have to take into account the new economics of selling cars. Last month I brought a new BMW, I negotiated a 5 year servicing deal which means I am only liable for tires, brake pads and possibly the clutch if it is burnt out but not if there is a mechanical fault. BMW have a vested interest in making cars that can last for as long as possible.
We should all be considering how we can place the liability of equipment makers back on the manufacturers. We'll end up with a less throw away society.
Indeed it was a very ... unbalanced piece from someone who has only visited Russia once in two decades (by his own admission).
Basically a self-proclaimed "serial entrepreneur" who has little understanding or insight on the subject is exploiting a politically/ emotionally charged topic for his own questionable gain. Why read this crap?
In personal income tax situation it would be an equivalent of paying a fee (bribe) to some 80 year old guy to sign him on as a dependent to claim a deduction your our income tax.
Here is a good explanation why corporations are taxable:
Corporations are participants of the economy and their profits depend on tax-financed public goods: healthy and educated workforces; good infrastructure; publicly enforced respect for contracts and property rights, and so on. When corporations avoid or evade tax, legally or illegally, they free ride on the backs of the rest of us. Stop taxing them, and you savagely undermine political community.
I wonder if using outlet would be considered a fair use of the facilities. The car owner's son was playing tennis at the school which means he was given a permission to use the facility. If this is the case then using the parking lot, drinking fountain, water in the bathroom, light or electric outlet at the school should be considered a fair use unless there is something that indicates otherwise (like a no-parking sign)
Absolutely agree that if there were no prior encounters with man who charged his car, then the cop acted in bad faith wasting tens of thousands of dollars of public money in judicial costs for a "crime" than could have been prevented with a simple community policing effort, basically telling the guy to unplug the car.
But of course considering that crappy newspapers like USAToday often omit information to make the stories sound bigger (technically not a lie), there may have been some background that caused the cop to arrest the car owner.
Also I wonder if using outlet would be considered a fair use of the facilities. The car owner son was playing tennis at the school which means he was given a permission to use the facility. If this is the case then using the parking lot, drinking fountain, light or electric outlet at the school should be considered a fair use.
On the other hand. Apple users can already determine the location of their phone and remotely lock or wipe out the iPhone using Apple's iCloud website. Thus apple has technical ability to do just the same - just a matter of sending few command by the server administrator.
Kudos to this comment for pointing out the addiction angle. There are definitely much more dangerous products being sold than even traditional cigarette, but hardly there is a legally marketed product more addictive than nicotine. The sale of such products should be strictly regulated, not only it because of the human costs but because it undermines the the principle of free market exchange when a customer is not at will to buy or not buy the product or alternatives. On the other hand the benefit of converting traditional smoker to e-cigs is undisputed.
Why hasn't anybody figured out to put a reasonable time limit on each device Mac address? 1 hour since you first log in should be enough to satisfy 90% of customers and discourage the 10% hogging seats. Its like saying - you are limited to 5 refills and being able to enforce it discretely. Who would object to that other than those taking advantage?
I think the reason is because that really didn't work for some reason. Starbucks experimented that idea for a while. (I think it was something like 3 hours for buying a something using registered card, and that then they decided to open it up...)
My personal opinion about MAC address filtering though, if they become the norm, everyone will start using a piece of software that changes MAC address periodically... (As it's already trivial to change your MAC address...)
It seems that Volvo adopted the "differentiation" strategy of some hardware manufacturers - needlessly boosting the specs which looks good on paper but doesn't do squat for the end user.
In my opinion it's move in the wrong direction for Volvo that used be known for it's simplicity.