Based on recent experiences, it will probably top the list with: "Buy error now on amazon!"
I kid you not, I have seen so many grossly illogical things it says it will sell me based on search terms entered into Google.

I would normally support the tailgater-at-fault argument. Particularly when people use the argument that red-light cameras cause rear-end crashes. However, in this case it may not be a simple rear-end at stake.
Instead substitute "auto-braking" with the phrase: "engine stall", and now you can start to imagine more critical moments in driving where a collision would be unavoidable such as pulling onto a main road, turning across traffic, etc.
My personal experience is that the Honda Odyssey with driver assist will stop if you cross into a cross-hatched area prior to a left-turn lane (in the US) without using your turn-signal. (Yeah, probably not good driving form and not a huge risk since it is before the intersection, but it caught me by surprise.) On a different topic, it also constantly fights me telling me I'm not 'steering enough' so that gets exhausting getting 'wiggled' all the time. Maybe most people jerk the wheel a lot more than I do, I dunno. Also, if trying to bias slightly out of lane to give room to a bike or pedestrian, the lane assistance may fight you a bit (I guess that is the point, but I wouldn't want it to plow into someone.)
 

I do sleep better at night knowing the military at least puts thought into many diverse potential threats. Maybe people are reading a bit too much into the Pentagon's certainty of this outcome. They study _lots_ of things that are potential threats. It doesn't mean they have certainty that they will happen. But yes, it should give pause that they expect at least some of the enumerated possibilities to occur. And yes, if the potential warrants more budget, then so be it. We don't live in a world where everything is 100% predictable and known, but we can prepare and adapt, or even preempt.

Not true either: https://cotap.org/per-capita-c...

What surprised me was Australia.

Most of Europe is about half of where we are. Frank and UK notably lower (high proportion of nuclear power.)

It is great marketing to use the 'free filing' phrase even though you still pay for the software box. Kinda like going to a restaurant where you pay for your meal, but the waiter will submit the order to the cook 'for free'

Been there, done that. Add-in normal life events and you eventually fall off the DIY wagon.

Exactly. Not everyone values time as much as they should.

We've been brainwashed into thinking any of those situations need to be complex. The tax law patchwork simply codifies that.

They make assurances about 'audit protection', but I'm pretty sure that is a hollow promise.

I suspect you are British or Canadian based on your spelling of offense? Maybe they are more forgiving than the IRS. There are penalties beyond the interest for making mistakes honestly or otherwise..

I used to do that. It was educational and entertaining, but still a waste of time. (time is money)
Also, not allowed to submit paper forms anymore in many states (yeah, I know this is about the Federal filing, but they are related.) Just wait until that reaches the Federal level.

Simple is very limited. If you have anything like a savings account, aunt Ida's inheritance, homeowner, etc., you may be forced out of the simple case. Whether the law specifically limits the simple case or not; you have to work through a provider that is not going to make the free option easy to find. Alternately, the fly-by-night free filing services may not be trustworthy with your privacy.
Just out of curiosity, why didn't the simple return apply to you as well?

Yes, and this for-profit industry makes sure as many people as possible fall into that category. They want to give the illusion that only applies to some, or that they will find some magical loophole for you. But none of this should be necessary for individuals.

This, exactly. I get tired of the liberals' comparisons to 'other developed nations' (however that is selected) on an array of issues. While, in fact, 'other developed nations' have major restrictions that are quietly omitted.

Maybe a literal wooden model is a silly way to look at it, but at least in some figurative sense it shouldn't be a patent on something speculative that is still basically unsolved. It doesn't have to be a useful device per se, just that the specific claims are actually embodied in a working form now with the technology claimed. i.e. producing a specific microscopic material. Lying about results should be a specific criminal offense (besides just fraud), i.e Theranos. It is too easy to troll a wide range of industries with a vague idea, then leech off others' work when they resolve the specific efforts of an actual implementation.

Competing businesses at least have to make some token effort to win your trust. Socialism isn't the utopia people want it to be in this regard when consumers have no choices.

Failure to appear _is_ a big deal in the US. Watch LivePD sometime, seems like 50% of what cops do is pick people up on bench warrants. The thing is, most of those people admit they knowingly missed their court date.

They key is how much reasonable effort the system attempts to inform people of those dates. If discovering your court date is set up as an Orwellian nightmare (seems to be the case in the UK from documentaries I've seen), vs. the US where the court date and jurisdiction is most likely printed right on the violation ticket at the time of issue. Or at least the court has a phone / email / web contact of some form.