It is a waste of precious resources to turn a woman into a computer programmer when she's a lot more valuable as a mother.
Ha ha! What a great satire of a shitheaded sexist troll you've done here. I especially like the bit about how any distraction, disruption or stress could cause a miscarriage. My doctor, a black belt in karate who trained up until her 8th month, would get a real belly laugh out of that. And my sensei, the EE, would surely get a chuckle out of the implication that she wasted her life by not being a baby machine. Keep polishing the satire and you could have a real career here.
(Assuming, of course, you're not serious. Because no one that stupid could survive.)
Airbags are for your head, seat belts are for your torso. If you enjoy slamming your head into your steering wheel, go ahead and disable your airbag. Even more fun are videos of an asymmetric head-on collision that favors one side over the other. The test dummies slam their heads into the frame of the car unless you have properly working forward and side airbags.
I used to work for an engineering society during the 1970s, and I read dozens of seat belt design papers and talked to engineers who designed them.
Those lap and shoulder belts were successfully designed so that in a collision up to at least 60 mph, the driver wouldn't hit the steering wheel, windshield, or windshield frame. These were collisions at about 60 degrees right and left, and with 2 cars offset by several feet. They proved it with computer models, crash tests and real-world studies.
It is true that lap and shoulder belts didn't provide as much protection against a side collision, but neither did airbags. Fortunately, those collisions were not as common. If another car hit the driver's seat head-on and perpendicularly, nobody had a practical way to save the driver. The side bags came after I left, and I'd like to see the studies.
A lot of the auto magazines of the time took the position that air bags added no significant safety, if you were wearing your seat belt. The only reason for requiring them was that we had a low seat belt wearing rate (and we still do).
In engineering terms, it seemed like a shame to spend $500 for complicated, falliable, single-use airbags, just because people refused to use $50 seat belts. But that's the way humans are, and you have to design for them.
I'd feel comfortable driving in a car with a well-designed seat belt and no airbags.
Auto manufacturers are required to report potential safety-related defects to the federal government. That information is a public record, so they have to put it on *.gov. That's easier than filling freedom of information act requests.
You should be able to go to kia.com, etc. but when you're dealing with life-threatening defects, it's a good practice to have a backup.
And as we know from the medical industry, it's a matter of judgment as to when you have enough reported defects to make a statistically significant decision that a hazard indeed exists. Manufacturers and government regulators often differ.
Google quickly populates with accurate results, but those accurate results will be mixed in with inaccurate results.
Some people have found that government sites are relatively accurate, compared to the other sources, or at least more accountable.
The reason the government is in the business of car recalls is that we left it to the auto companies in the past and they failed.
The government has no right to a monopoly on any weapon.
However, my neighbor storing atomic weapons in his garage is a reasonable threat to my safety and so should be heavily regulated. If he can meet the same safety standards as the government (maybe some billionaire collector could do this), the state has no legitimate authority to have nukes of its own while denying him one. Or, ya know, maybe nukes are an inherent threat to people and no one, state or otherwise, U.S. or Iran, can have them. But "we can have them, you can't" is not a logically defensible argument.
My neighbor storing machine guns or a typical shooter's supply of ammo in his garage (again, subject to safe storage requirements, no storing a loaded machine gun pointed at my house) is no more a threat to my safety than him having the usual home hardware and chemicals in there. (
Even a tank is not threat -- and indeed, for just $1175 you can spend a day driving one around.)
If insurgents get sufficient backing by a foreign power or by a faction in the military then the whole question of legally owned small arms is moot.
You have to start somewhere.
Microsoft poisoned them killing the company
Bullshit. Nokia mismanaged itself to death by promoting infighting and sabotaging other product groups (rather than competing with other companies) until adopting Windows Phone and killing internal OS development was the least bad option.
Well, it isn't SC, It's SC County...
Have fun running fiber to someone in Bonny Doon, Corralitos or the Aptos hills.
Yeah well, nobody should expect 100% coverage.
This is one time me and the FOSSies are actually on the same page, as just like windows 8 was forced from on high and gave the users a big fat greasy finger so too is systemd being pushed by corporate with exactly zero fucks given about what the end users want.
Most end users don't care about the init system one way or another, since most end users don't ever mess with it. On the other hand, every end user was forced to mess with Metro. That's the difference.