That's my opinion too.

Unfortunately, after a certain amount of actual progress we are now regressing again.

Yeah, we have a long history of not practicing what we preach.

Remember when the USA took pride in being a melting pot?

The companies like door dash etc do not care if you do not deliver. They list you anyway, pay full price for the food, slap a 35% fee on top and sell your food.

Then something doesn't add up. My understanding is that the fees that the delivery company charges the restaurant are what is hurting the restaurants. But if your restaurant doesn't have a contract with the delivery company (i.e. "they list you anyway") then that fee is $0, isn't it?

So what's the harm? It sounds like any fees the restaurants are paying, are something they've opted into.

I can see how bad experiences (caused by the delivery service which otherwise wouldn't have happened) could reduce order frequency, but that doesn't seem to be what people are talking about here.

How did "The Innovation That’s Killing Restaurant Culture" turn into "How Delivery Is Destroying American Restaurants?"

** letter. SIGH.

If only there were a noun form of the adjective "female" used when applied to a human. Maybe something beginning with the word "w", I dunno.

Did you actually expect the house to come with furniture, without an explicit statement that it's furnished?

What if the previous owner hadn't left yet, and the pictures were of the previous owner's furniture - would you have just presumed that you get their furniture?

I don't see any issue with this. Real estate agents used to virtually insert furniture via non-AI means. Here you're just going to be having an AI model that generates a depth map from the existing space and is then allowed to imagine in whatever furniture is described to fit into that depth map - it just makes the process easier / faster (letting the agent iterate through possibilities faster) and better looking.

Pretty sure that whatever it is, it involves some translation of Fuck the English.

I always thought that pressing those thousands of old turbojets just sitting in storage into service for backup generators would be a good idea rather than junking them. All it would take would be one enterprising CEO to start snatching them up and when word got out, there would suddenly be a run on boneyards everywhere.

Worse, they were using NI.

Or do what my schools did: ban them in the classroom and give plenty of pop quizzes. If you can't do the work on your own successfully in class with nothing but your pencil, paper, and brain, you fail. Period. Today's entitled mommies will scream, but fuck 'em.

If they were dropping this proprietary stuff in favor of a standard then this would be really great news. An API for car integration (so that you don't need iOS or Android) would be a true advance.

But it turns out they were merely thinking "We're letting the wrong people fuck you over. We should have a piece of that action."

The reason for the rules seems like common sense to me. There is a certain distance needed to stop or change lanes when driving at highway distance. If the truck breaks down just over a hill, cars won't see it early enough unless the warning signals are put further back where they can be seen coming up the hill.

I seriously doubt that these rules were just shit someone made up. The NHTSA has so many studies regarding road regulations and guidance. They might be outdated for modern technology, and might be worse than newer alternatives - I don't doubt that hasn't been studied yet - but I would absolutely wager that there were studies done to justify the original numbers.

Furthermore, when congress delegated regulatory power to these agencies they included laws dictating how the rules needed to be determined, specifically so you can't have a bunch of political hacks changing them on a whim. Changes to the regulation need to be justified, and there needs to be comment period to gather any information and concerns that the agency itself might have overlooked, respond to the comments and incorporate any changes as appropriate. I don't want regulators to be able say "this is just some crap" and change rules every four years because they shoot from the hip. That means that changes take 1-3 years depending on how complicated and motivated the agency is, but it is worthwhile to end up with better regulations and avoid being constantly jerked around.

Weapons detections systems send automated alerts. The specific form depends on the system. But no system is dialing up unanticipating randos on the phone and going, "Hello, police? I've got an emergency here!"

And unless the system had facial ID, and the police knew the "suspect", what they had to go on was the picture from the security camera, so they were already looking at the supposed "gun" in the picture and still saw fit to act like this.