RafiqM
Joined 13 years ago
Joined 13 years ago
The marketshare of electric vehicles globally will be > 90% in the future. And not "the future" like some Star Trek utopia.
Ireland has committed to no new petrol/diesel cars from 2030 onwards. UK has committed to 2040 but is likely moving that to 2030. Other countries in the EU will follow with similar timelines.
This is in just over 10 years. If your cars all need to be electric by 2030, you need to have already put in place the strategy to do that and be already implementing your manufacturing chain. If it's 2040 you have a bit more time, but you would still want to be doing it within the next 5 years.
I do think what you suggest would be fair and sensible. I do not believe the voters will see it so reasonably.
I'm from Ireland, where we had something similar happen. People still talk about how the govt will just hold multiple referendums till they get the answer they want on an issue. This is in reference to referendums that happened 10 and 20 years ago. It doesn't matter that these decisions have proven positive for the country - there's still resentment and bitterness, and this was an issue with far less emotional weight than brexit.
Essentially, they want to honor the will of the people. The will of the people, by democratic vote, was to leave the EU.
With that in mind, they have no options that are in any way good:
1) Push ahead and exit with no-deal (economically disastrous)
2) Push ahead and exit with the proposed deal (economically bad while also not really exiting)
3) Declare it a bad idea and just don't do it (political suicide for everyone involved & creates distrust in democratic process)
4) Hold another referendum where it's going to have to be a decision between staying in or exiting with no deal (also political suicide & creates distrust).
There's no way for anyone to win here. I think the best option is for the PM to "take one for the team" (i.e. the country) and take option 3/4, knowing that it will be the end of her and her party.
The additional point he's trying to make is that app developers should use FLAG_SECURE if its confidential data - messaging probably should be, and his bitcoin app should almost certainly be.
I have no interest in meeting my neighbors. Having them come over unannounced would literally ruin my day.
It's not about you. It's about me wanting to choose when, where, and who to socially interact with.
There will be a tiny cohort of players who will play this and genuinely enjoy it. The rest will be people who thought it was amazing (it was, in 2004) but have not realized that for 2018, vanilla is in so many ways a bad game.
This is the entire reason battlegrounds were introduced - balanced world PVP was unviable on almost every server. It was one of the primary complaints about the game, and could even have resulted in the loss of the PVP orientated player entirely if it had not been addressed.
You may ask why I say privacy, when recent events have proved that an illusion.
I would argue that it's not privacy from the government, or some big unnamed corporate that people are looking for - It's privacy from their other networks. Almost nobody I've talked to cares if someone not directly related to their life has access to their data. Now, I believe they should have this privacy whether they care or not, but that's a separate discussion to "what are people's needs and desires?".
So I suggest that WhatsApp/FB do in fact provide all the needs of the users.
(I'm not saying you should be dishonest and lie about your conviction, but if they don't ask then no harm no foul)
Facebook Audience Network is a display ad network like Adwords.
It's deployed widely across the web and mobile apps.