Yep. Maybe we're looking at this from the wrong angle when we talk about safety.
We're all sitting here thinking "it won't be safer than me!!" when we should really be thinking "It'll be far safer out there if all those idiots start using it".
As George Carlin said: %GeorgeCarlinQuote%
Yep Dunning and Kruger were above average drivers too
Yep it would be far better to a deal like with Foxconn, so that way her district not only gets bent over with the bill but also gets to watch the company take the money and vanish, that's what a great dealmaker does.
FWIW, I think jcr is right: if the AC he's replying to really believes humans are an infection, then it's up to him to do s.t. about it--and starting with himself would prove his sincerity.
And for the record, I can't understand why the AC was voted "insightful". Every time there's an article that refers to possible life on other worlds, or to humans traveling to other worlds (Mars, say), people post things that are essentially the same as what the AC said. There's nothing new or insightful about that kind of comment, it's been done hundreds of times before.
Logically - If he (note: assuming gender) truly believes it, he wouldn't (and shouldn't) start with himself. He should aim to solve the problem to as much of an extent as is possible. So likely should be looking to trigger a global nuclear winter or similar.
And discounting someone's input just because "it's not new or insightful" is stupid.
Is the input true? Is it free (or largely free of bias)? Is it relevant to the thread? These are far better questions
The serendipity at the water cooler argument has been proven wrong by 6 months of remote work.
citation needed.
I know we are still searching for a solution about how you connect the people on anything more than a superficial level in order to get meaningful idea exchange. It is fine if your whole team was well established pre-covid, but if you have a new team then we definitely haven't solved how to get the most out of connecting with them. And tech companies are just a sum of the ideas multiplied by some interpersonal connective factor
Which is it, biased based on skin color, or on race? The two aren't exactly the same thing... (Pretty clear it's skin color, not race.)
You are indeed right in your pedantry, but if we are going to be a pedant then the fact that "race" doesn't exist from a biological point of view should figure in to it. I guess they meant skin colour and most people would understand that we conflate the two since one doesn't really exist.
Even if the aftermarket module did replace a Tesla module, clearly it isn't equivalent. The aftermarket module sends more power thriugh the controllers and to the motors, making them both get hotter, and heat accelerates (and sometimes downright causes) failure. It's unlikely that the power curve of the aftermarket module matches that of the Tesla option, with the same calculation based on the temperature sensors.
And what do you base this on?
Tesla will gladly send this same amount of power through the controllers when you pay $2000 extra. If this company can demonstrate that their mod does the equivalent (eg they have reverse engineered and worked out how to do identical) then are you good with this? What if their solution is actually better?
Because there is nothing in the article to state either way on this module's code vs Tesla code performance. The $2k was always just a cash grab "upsell".
(s)he
I like that people aren't just using "he" or "she" but just pointing out that "they are" is the same number of characters as "(s)he is", and it is faster to type. They is also more inclusive than he/she, as it includes non-binary (which is still literally millions of people across the globe).
It is also perfectly fine English to use "they" for one person. If you need an everyday example think about when you are driving and say something like "They cut me off!" - it is only the one driver you are referring to.
It also can be used verbally more easily and doesn't sound like you are being hampered by language to be inclusive.
Just something to think about.
Why worry about that when you can deny it and kick the problem down the road a few years to keep that corporate profit rolling in for another couple years.
If we hadn't been subdued by our corporate overlords we would've acted on the threats we've known for decades like:
Climate change
Inequality
Prevention of crime via societal support (rather than for profit prisons)
Investment in healthcare systems and pandemic response bodies
More importantly, they did not change strategy when the evidence came out that Australia's response was sufficient.
There has been a major outbreak in Victoria recently. But that has nothing to do with the level of lock downs, and everything to do with sloppy quarantine. The Victorian numbers are going down, rather more slowly than hoped, but they peaked at 700/day, now at 200/day.
You must live in a different Australia to me.
NZ recent outbreak is sloppy quarantine (even if they can't find patient 0 right now). They had a short but severe lockdown. Now they are having a smaller second lockdown.
Australia has tried to have it both ways. We didn't go for eradication, and we were close enough that it was viable. Instead Scummo decided business over health. This is why we have been living on a knife edge for 6 months. We keep having outbreaks that only get MOSTLY contained, before allowing 2 others to take their place. And every time something happens it gets big, and gets big fast. The only way to get on top of it is severe lockdowns. This is why Victoria actually followed the NZ model to get this most recent outbreak under control. Go HARD lockdown if you want numbers to decrease. Half half didn't work (they tried that with the suburb based lockdowns).
NZ managed to get back to almost normal life. We haven't. Our businesses are "open" but with so much uncertainty and bouncing in and out of restrictions, they can't plan or operate in any meaningful or effective way. The Australian economy is likely to suffer as much or more in the long term for this reason, with the only hope that we can get to a vaccine soon. We have thrown small business under the bus, not to mention allowing more people to die that we could've prevented.
I'd take NZ's model any day.
Well your "real tell" says you are wrong. We see preliminary reports saying covid deaths are likely undercounted not overcounted - as they only account for about two thirds of the excess deaths. So likely many of the deaths being reported as other causes likely were indirectly (or even directly) covid deaths too.
Tesla plans to market chassis, software, batteries, etc. to other carmakers. It's a matter of time until a small company buys these and sells an electric car with open source, highly customizable.
I don't think the lawyers would be stupid enough to allow that cash cow to escape. The terms of the license would prevent open sourcing.
Under the first sale doctrine, it's arguably not ILLEGAL for a Tesla owner to modify their copy of the firmware. It's also arguably not illegal for Tesla's software to display a warning when detects that the firmware has been tampered with.
It is also arguably not ILLEGAL for Tesla to kindly tell you to Go Fuck Yourself when it detects you've tampered with firmware on a device that is easily capable of killing people.
TL; DR - Do whatever the hell you want to "your" car. Just don't be surprised at the consequences.
The law should uphold how you use potential lethal weapons you own (cars, guns, bags of fertiliser,
Otherwise they had better be also watching for when someone changes the wheels, adds a spoiler or does any other 'everyday' modification that could result in different performance that could result in injury/death. If they aren't concerned about that, they are showing they are only concerned about the $.
and if you only tested one arc a billion times because that is representative of real driving, then you've left an "unsafe" system that will crash
Remind me how often humans crash?
It doesn't have to be perfect... just better than meatbags (that are also distracted by smartphones, kids,
or maybe, just maybe -
The fact that an unemployment stimulus is more than what some earned working suggests not that the stimulus is too high, but the minimum wage is too low.
If you can't afford to pay people enough that they can earn a decent living and stay in business, then you don't deserve to be in business. Too much profit for US companies comes at the cost of squeezing those with the least (and if the rich don't want to pay taxes either - go back to top tax rate of 90% if needed).
Your sense of how to treat the common person is horrible, as indicated that what most other developed countries consider moderate to conservative (eg universal healthcare - maybe means tested) is considered a "radical lefty" policy.
I don't want to see the US fall, but it looks almost inevitable at the moment - and I'm honestly thinking I need to start enrolling my toddler into chinese speaking classes.
"Protozoa are small, and bacteria are small, but viruses are smaller than the both put together."
