This comments is left blank intentionally.
Only a Tesla fangirl would get all twisted up in knots over the episode.
Only a Top Gear fangirl would think that Top Gear is a car show that reviews cars.
It si not about the cars. They could just as easily insult celebrities or trees all the time.
It is basically Grumpy Old Man.
Or an asshole takes one to an airport and brings down something like a 747 or just does tens of millions worth of property damage...
Even if they were navigating by camera, those cameras tend to be wide angle and relatively low resolution and there's a heck of a lot of information to process at once... I highly doubt they even saw the shotgun..
At least one real problem with shooting a drone out of the sky is that if you penetrate the battery it could become a fire or explosion hazard.
Now that really is a good idea.. doesn't directly knock down the aircraft and sends a very definite message.
There is the question here of how big and expensive this drone was.. The $40 category really are toys and basically can only barely fly outside anyway - because their motors are not powerful enough. Proper midsized drones designed to fly outside and carry a camera and maybe with a camera gimbal start at about $200 - $800. The most advanced and powerful machines with things like stabilized gimbals and advanced cameras, video link, GPS control, and long range radio, can cost anything up to about $5,000 to $ 10,000..
I know I'd be plenty pissed if someone shot my $5k drone down. If shot down those bigger drones could injure or theoretically even kill someone and could also present a significant fire or explosion risk.. (the risk is exactly the same adjusted for scale as shooting the gas tank on a car or the battery on an electric car)
He invented something so he got a 18-year country-wide monopoly on the idea. What's the problem?
He invented a place on your computer desktop that you can click with a mouse and it will open a menu.
Genius, I tell you. Who would have ever thought something like that was possible?
But they didn't win, did they? If they didn't win, it's irrelevant.
So, you think it's "irrelevant" that this sacred GMO industry that you worship sued to block other companies from labeling their food as "GMO free"? You are truly a zealot. It wasn't about them trying to "prevent FUD". It was about them trying to block the free speech of people who don't use their products. And this is the industry to which you're willing to hand over the keys to our food supply?
I still don't see you providing any shred of evidence that there are proven human health concerns for GMOs.
For me, this is not about health concerns. If I was concerned about the food I eat, I wouldn't have had that burrito from the food cart lady with the prison tattoos this afternoon.
This is entirely political. It's a pro-consumer issue for me. The consumers are paying the bill for GMOs, so if they want, they should get to know what they're paying for. I'm not asking for a law to be passed, I'm asking for food companies to start labeling their products truthfully. And to stop with using lobbyists to influence the government to pass laws to keep consumers from knowing what they're buying. And consumers should continue to run from GMO products until the industry is willing to label their products with this one truthful fact.
And I want transparency in the patenting of basic foodstuffs, because that matters to me, and I'm the one paying the bill.
Rent doesn't go up fast if you move frequently. They only jack up the rent when you stay there a long time. Then they lower it to attract new tenants.
You're never going to pay off a house if you buy a house, move in 2 years, buy another house, move in 2 years, etc. The overhead costs of buying and selling are just way too high. So it makes more sense to rent until you're in a place where you're pretty sure you're going to stay for at least 5 years.
Personally, I really don't want to be where I am now in 5 years, so I rent. My current location is just a stepping stone. For most engineers, it should be the same; these positions just aren't long-term any more.
and he came up with the Start button, for which he holds the patent today.
Oh, how I hate our patent system.
If the customers "don't" get what they want, then buy the (likely overpriced) stuff labelled "GMO free"
I bet you didn't know that the GMO industry sued to prevent people from labeling their food "GMO free".
Face it, they just don't want you to know what you're buying.
Nutritional information and list of ingredients are *government mandated*.
But the kosher and halal designations are not. Nor is the word "delicious" in big letters or any of the other words on the label. When I walk into the grocery, why doesn't the sign above the corn say, "Roundup Corn 3 for $1"? If the wondrous, miraculous benefits of GMO foods really exist, why doesn't the GMO industry advertise that fact to the consumers?
And if you say "They can't, because there's so much FUD", then you should know that the only proper commercial response to FUD is exercising your freedom of speech to market your products in a positive manner. The answer to bad speech is more good speech, not doing everything you can to obfuscate what is a truthful statement: "This food is made from genetically modified organisms". I would also request that the patent be clearly marked on the label. I want to know if the basic foodstuffs I buy are patented. Or is that also information I should not be allowed to have?
If they had been declared legal persons, you know someone would've tried to marry one.
If they are not legal persons, that makes them illegal persons. Right?
If they outlaw chimps, then only outlaws will have chimps.
The chimps need to band together and register as a corporation!
I think it's already been done.