This isn't one weird guy making a nutty comment one time. This is written on signs and barked out as chants at so-called "pro-Palestinian" rallies around the world every single day. College campuses across the US are awash in students and faculty chanting these slogans. These are popular sentiments among the "pro-Palestinian" groups. And they're just outright open calls for genocide.

I actually agree with you about the West Bank settlements, especially after the October attacks. It's felt very much like taking advantage of the situation. My comment was reserved for Gaza itself, where Israel has actually gone above and beyond the Geneva Protocols. And doing things like providing advanced warning for attacks have cost them militarily.

A hospital is a valid military target if it's being used for military purposes (e.g., storing weapons caches and hiding military personnel).

Geneva Protocol I, Article 21: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org...
Additional Protocol, Article 12: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org...
Convention IV, Article 19: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org...

When your terrorist buddies stored weapons, ammunition, and military personnel in a hospital that Israel built for Gaza, it lost its protected status.

Quite often looks just like it though. Like, just like it. "From the river to the sea", "by all means necessary", etc. That's like the Hamas theme music. And if you're humming Hamas happy tunes, you're supporting Hamas and their methods. Further, support for Hamas remains widespread in all available polling in Gaza. So a lot of them are on board with the genocidal terrorists running their government and all their actions as well. Supporting them is also supporting Hamas.

False equivalence in the extreme. Israel attacks valid military targets, even when fighting terrorists who don't follow Geneva or any other convention on war. Israel goes above and beyond by broadcasting where and when they're going to strike so civilians can leave. Except Hamas often doesn't let them leave because as Hamas themselves have stated in television interviews: dead Palestinian women and children help their cause and they aim to maximize the dead civilians on their side. Meanwhile, you've got Hamas specifically targeting women and children for rape and murder and live-streaming the whole thing to the world.

So no, they aren't the same. And it would take one ignorant motherfucker to think they are.

Fingerprints specifically are a password you can never change that you leave copies of everywhere you go. It's the worst possible "security" imaginable. It's just convenient.

You can certainly make an argument for the former, but as for the latter, the copyright holder in this case has been aware of the image's use for decades and taken no action to defend their copyright. Case law on this is clear: they have no claim at this point. Further, the implication of legitimate academic and research use over the course of several decades would itself make any copyright claim difficult at best. At this point, it is highly unlikely that the wishes of the copyright holder matter, from a legal perspective.

Ahh yes, living in a $700,000 house, driving $100,000 cars; WHAT PEASANTS THESE ARE!

Seriously, what planet do you live on?

Most people don't get educated in college. And most people don't need college to become a high earner. We should be investing heavily in trade schools for anyone who has an interest in becoming an electrician, plumber, mechanic, etc. We also need a massive number of additional nurses and nursing techs, and most IT jobs don't really require more than a decent trade school either (although there is a distinct lack of "decent" supply and a voluminous overstock of "garbage" IT trade schools). Handyman, landscaping, roofing; all lucrative careers which do not require college. The electrician down the street from me who owns his own business has his work truck parked out in front of his house and his Maserati parked in the driveway. Landscapers here won't take any job worth under $5,000-$10,000. They just say "no thanks". And if you do have a $20,000 backyard renovation to do, expect to wait 6-8 months for a start time.

None of these people require classes in 19th century Romanian poetry to perform their jobs well and make tons of money. And none of them needed to be saddled with $100,000 in debt when they got started. They went to trade schools or they started apprenticing and they put in their time learning the work, and then they started making bank.

If someone's using 1,000 IPv4 addresses on AWS, they're already being ridiculous. But what they'll do instead is just NAT/proxy that traffic to one IPv4 address and save $4,000 a month. But nobody's going through recertifying all their applications, retraining their devs and others, and whatever else to work on IPv6 when 95% of the world is still primarily using IPv4 and 100% of the world still fully supports IPv4 just because Amazon decided to charge a few bucks a month for it.

IPv4 will still be the primary 10 years from now. Probably 20.

No production vehicle on Earth matches this description. This would either be a prototype or custom built vehicle. And I'll bet it doesn't have air bags, side impact beams, crumple zones, computerized driver assist, anti-lock brakes, and so on. In other words, one step up from a moped. And most people are not about to put their children in something that's unsafe relative to every other production vehicle allowed on the roadways of western nations.

So show me the crash test data to demonstrate that this miracle vehicle doesn't kill everyone inside when it's involved in a 60mph multi-vehicle collision with a rollover event. You're bringing this up to try and win an argument, but it fails as soon as anyone starts actually thinking. Because in the real world, it doesn't work.

In this case, there were two humans and one AI.

The first human walked into the street into the path of moving cars.
The second human drove their car into the human that was walking, hit them, then fled the scene.
The AI did precisely what the police said you should do: stop the vehicle immediately and wait for first responders to arrive to handle the situation.

Your argument is things would have been better off with ANOTHER human involved? After two humans CREATED the situation and the only one to do things correctly was the AI?

Your personal bias against AVs/AI is having you make arguments that are laughably absurd.

Not a lot of human drivers who remain undistracted for any length of time these days. All I see are phones and makeup and touchscreens and eyes everywhere but on the road and immediate surroundings. Would a human driver in place of AI have avoided this accident? I give it 1 chance in 20. Would a human driver in place of AI have panic-pushed the accelerator when they saw a human being thrown at them, thereby causing significantly worse injuries to the pedestrian? I give that 1 in 2.

The pedestrian has about 1000% better odds of surviving this with the AI driver.

A human WAS in the other car and not only FAILED to anticipate the need to stop for the jaywalking pedestrian, but then proceeded to flee the scene after striking the pedestrian with their car.

A human in the next lane is no more likely to be paying any better attention, nor to behave any more logically than the autonomous vehicle, which did exactly as it should in that situation: stop as quickly as possible and if contact cannot be avoided, remain in place pending response from authorities. The AV drove forward just as any driver would. Most humans these days have their noses buried in their phones that they wouldn't notice a woolly mammoth shitting on their windshield. God only knows how much damage your average driver would do to the pedestrian in their panic accelerator punching following the accident.

You're absolutely right. Which is why Michael Scott should have sued Garmin when he drove his car into a fucking lake in Dunder Mifflin Infinity.

In The Office episode "Dunder Mifflin Infinity", Michael Scott has a GPS installed in his car and drives it directly into a lake when it tells him to turn, despite Dwight's numerous warnings that they were about to drive into a lake.

According to this lawsuit, Michael Scott should have sued Garmin. Dumbest shit I've seen all day. These people sued Google because Google has a lot of money and will probably throw some at them to go away. What Google should do is mount a massive defense against the lawsuit and counter sue for legal fees to discourage this type of litigious crap rather than rewarding it with a settlement.

What if, instead of the bridge being washed out, there were a child standing in the middle of it and the vehicle killed the child? Who is responsible for ensuring that the road is free from hazards prior to the vehicle traveling across it? (hint: it sure as shit ain't Rand McNally)