Yeah, basically it's still amazing tech and a car that should see amazing MPG ratings for commuters. Unfortunately the way this is being handled is going to be spun into a very bad light by competitors and the folks that think global warming is a myth and that alternate fuel sources are a waste of time.

Unfortunately the way this is being handled is going to be spun into a very bad light by competitors and the folks that think global warming is a myth and that alternate fuel sources are a waste of time.

I wish more things re: marketing had changed post-bankruptcy. The new CEO is emphasizing playing offense and this is going to be all defense.

I've driven the VOLT a handful of times, and it's fun. The iPhone app is way cool, and the cockpit electronics are heavily influenced by Apple. It performs as expected, IF one realizes that it's primarily an electric vehicle. Driving behavior does need to be modified. It handles well, and runs more smoothly than I anticipated. It has a sport mode that slightly decreases efficiency, but ups the torque. I managed to get about 35 miles on a charge, and averaged about 83 mpg in DC traffic.

Will someone have something negative to say about it? Yes,it's not a car for everybody. The technology that's behind it, though, is pretty amazing.

As someone who doesn't really understand the nuts and bolts but still cares, and wishes we had better (less polluting / more efficient) cars, thanks for all the explanations and discussion!

I'm assuming that a big difference (from the driver's standpoint) between the Leaf and the Volt is that the Volt can do more than 100 miles at a time? (edit: maybe not?)

From the driver's standpoint, I'd say the big difference is that you can drive a Volt on gasoline if you need to. The Leaf has great range for an all-electric, but you're still limited on how far you can go.

Or more generally, the Volt can replace a regular car with no problem while a Leaf is more of a niche vehicle.

The Leaf has great range for an all-electric, but you're still limited on how far you can go.

It all comes down to the infrastructure. You have to make sure you can plug it in to recharge. There's no safety net. If you're going to a cabin in the woods that has no electricity, you probably don't want to take the Leaf.

The infrastructure discussion is the same one I was having ten years ago when I worked with Honda to market the CNG Civic. The OEMs don't want to make the vehicles if they can't be fueled, and the fuel providers don't want to put in the refueling stations if there are no vehicles to use them. It's one big game of chicken, and innovation is stifled as a result.

Oh my God.

For over a year, my outgoing Comcast e-mails have been delayed for five minutes. Many incoming e-mails are also delayed for five minutes, including LJ e-mails (and that recently jumped to forty-five minutes for no apparent reason). I have had many frustrating chat sessions that produced zero results.

Recently, I noticed that for some reason, any e-mails I sent regarding AMWA business were sent immediately. It was really strange and made no sense. I wondered if "AMWA" was getting it through the filters. That wasn't it. And then I realized that when I send e-mails for business, I use my business signature rather than my personal signature.

So I sent an e-mail with my business signature. It sent immediately. And then I started doing some testing, and I discovered that it was the blog URL in my signature that was responsible. I removed it, and my e-mails sent immediately. I put a blogspot URL in the text of my e-mail, and the five-minute delay returned.

WHAT THE FUCK, COMCAST. WHAT THE LIVING FUCK.

Do you (or does Comcast) have a virus checker that might be examining your links for problems?

It has to be Comcast, Liese, since I have the same issues whether I'm using Outlook at home or the webmail.

Sunil, Try converting it with tinyurl, see if they slow that down.

You need to send this info to Wired, Engadget, or Gizmodo. They probably would love to check this out.