I have never heard of Vine, but it sounds like Tiktok in much much worse. And since it comes from Dorsey, it's safe to assume it's gonna be shit.

I love this idea! I've got friends and relatives of all ages who love board games, quizzes, murder mysteries and stuff like that. I can see these games, especially the Knives Out one, providing some really fun get-togethers.

"If you arent doing things on the same timescale and using the same approach as the company I wank over, then you shouldn't even bother".

Thats your post summed up in one sentence.

Matt Walsh is a never trumper?

It's actually a terrible idea.

As someone with an SCCA license used to driving racing cars that have much higher performance than nearly everything on the road (including your Tesla), I can tell you that no mass-market road car is hard to drive. The problem is never the car, it's the driver, or more accurately their lack of ability.

To properly solve a problem you need to attack the root cause, not one of it's symptoms.
If there are people out there that can't truly can't handle jthe acceleration of a car or type of car then they shouldn't have been legally allowed to drive it in the first place.

Except for the first time in basically automobile history, cars have broken acceleration records to the point it's physics limiting acceleration and not the vehicle.

ICE are slow and laggy - they take a while to get up to speed, which generally has limited acceleration for normal vehicles.

These days production EVs are easily able to get beyond those limits way too easily, and getting 0-60 times in 3 seconds isn't unusual. (a 0-60 in 3 seconds used to be the holy grail, and now production EVs are beating it on a regular basis).

I'm guessing China probably saw a bunch of rear-enders where some EV driver ran into the rear of the car ahead of them because the EV out-accelerated the car in front. And chances are everyone is close to everyone else so if you're a bit too enthusiastic with the pedal you might not be able to hit the brakes in time.

Jumped.

LOL. And the flying car for the masses is months away too.

It's good to see that another US company has achieved booster landing, however I don't think Blue Origin will be much, if any, of a competitor at all. It took BO 25 years to achieve this, a full 9 years after SpaceX landed on their first ocean platform and 10 years after SpaceX's first successful booster landing. Starship is going to put New Glenn out of business very soon and I don't see Blue Origin having the industrial mindset to design and build new rockets quickly. Falcon 9 is already a proven and much cheaper option. BO is going to have to have to adopt the "go fast and break things" attitude that SpaceX uses to compete with them. Time will tell I suppose.

Also, the only realistic way to create a true "unintended acceleration" without pedal misapplication is something getting stuck in the pedal or the pedal getting stuck down, which is not actually a subtle thing (again, these things have happened, but they're dwarfed by how often people hit the wrong pedal). Just sensor readings alone don't cut it. As a general rule, pedals have multiple sensors reading the pedal position (typically 2-3). They have to agree with each other, or the target acceleration is set to zero. A sensor failure doesn't cut it. Also, Hall-effect sensors are highly reliable.

Oh, and there's one more "failure mechanism" which should be mentioned, which is: creep. Some EVs are set to creep or have creep modes, to mimic how an ICE vehicle creeps forward when one lifts their foot off the brakes. If someone forgets they have this on, it can lead to "unintended acceleration" reports. There have been cases where for example the driver gets in an accident, but not intense enough to trigger the accident sensors, and the car keeps "trying to drive" after the accident (aka, creep is engaged). People really should not engage creep mode, IMHO - the fact that ICEs creep forward is a bug, not a feature.

All the person in these "runaways" had to do was lift their foot off the accelerator. Or even leave their foot on the accelerator and just press the brakes, as the brakes can overpower the motor (think of how fast you accelerate when you slam on the pedal at highway speeds vs. how fast you slow down when you slam on the brakes).

Regulatory agencies the world over are constantly getting reports of "runaway unintended acceleration". Nearly every time they investigate, the person mixed up the pedal and the brake. When the car starts accelerating, in their panic they push said "brake" (actually the pedal) harder, and keep pushing it to the floor trying to stop the car. In their panic, people almost never reevaluate whether they're actually pushing the right pedal. It's particularly common among the elderly and the inebriated, and represents 16 thousand crashes per year in the US alone.

If your car starts accelerating when you're "braking", get out of your panic, lift your foot up, then make sure you *actually* put it on the brake, and you'll be fine.

This is the first time I've ever heard Eiríkr "The Red" (TH)orvaldsson referred to as "a shipping marketer" ;)

1) 1850-1900 is not "The Little Ice Age"
2) The Little Ice Age was not global, while you're talking about global climate reconstructions. The planet as a whole was not cold in the Little Ice Age.
3) You're talking about the basis of a particular climate target, not what the science is built on.
4) The mid 1800s is around when we started getting reasonably good regular quasi-global ground climate measurements, hence it's nice for establishing a target. That's why HADCRUT, which is based on historic measurements, starts in 1850. The first version of HADCRUT started in 1881 when the data was even better, but as more old data was recovered and digitized, it was extended to 1850. You can go further back, but you not only lose reading quality, but also are more confised to mainly regional records (Europe).
5) 1850-1900 was not a global cold period.

There's not some sort of conspiracy theory. The target is based on relative to when we have actual comparative data, and variations in modern preindustrial levels are a few tenths of a degree, not "several degrees" as per climate targets.

It’s a circle.Communism and Fascism tend to be meet at the extremes. A ruling elite over powerless subjects.

When they say "pre-industrial levels", when do you think they mean? The 19th century (even though the industrial revolution was well underway), usually 1890 specifically.

What year is used depends entirely on the study. Some start at the advent of satellite measurements, some at the advent of modern ground-based measurements, some with the era of semi-reliable ground-based measurements, some incorporate further back with more fragmentary measurements, and others use proxies - some recent proxies from 200, 300, 400 etc years ago, others thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds, millions of years ago or more. There is no single timeframe that is examined. Numerous studies evaluate each different source, and the different proxies are commonly plotted out relative to each other.

Streaming a game over the Internet is not comparable to streaming a game to a PC in the same room using a dedicated connection between a the headset and PC, where the antennas and radios on both sides are dedicated to the streaming video.

This is not something new. This is something that has been in widespread use for years, working quite well in existing headsets, like Oculus Air Link, Virtual Desktop, Steam Link, etc. The largest complaints about these solutions was often not latency, but image quality. This is what Valve aims to fix with foveated streaming, and all the hands-on coverage that we've seen so far indicates that it works extremely well. Valve is claiming 1-2ms of latency for a current-gen GPU, and 3-4ms of latency for an older GPU. Frames don't pass instantly over a DisplayPort cable either. You can't race the beam on a low-persistence display, you need to wait for the entire frame to transfer over.

Wireless is subject to interference, but 6 GHz is a very large and not widely used part of the spectrum, and interference doesn't cause a disconnection, it causes errors in the data or dropped packets. You don't wait for retransmissions, you just keep going and handle any missing or corrupted data through error correction or error resiliency. If a dropped packet causes a slight loss of detail in a small part of the frame for 1/120th of a second, you may not even notice.