Concrete is interesting, because while it releases a lot of CO2 during production, it also absorbs it when it is curing.

But you still generally produce buckets of CO2 during the cooking process generating heat, so yeah, those bits could be replaced. I wouldn't worry about CO2 released from the chemical restructuring, because it'll just be absorbed again when you actually form and set the concrete.

The heating bit's around 4% of global emissions, so it's pretty close to the "don't worry about it" line, but we can probably green it up a lot with the right technology without much expense, so why not.

But it's pretty close to just being in the miscellaneous category.

I'll admit to forgetting about heating building, but cooling is effectively 100% electric, and thus covered under 1 and 3.

*googles*

It looks like ~8% of CO2 emissions are from building heating, which is surprisingly high. That would shove itself into #5, just under steel production.

Why? In a fixed field where you can have arbitrary amounts of equipment, what's stopping you from simply attaching a "sufficient" number of cables to draw it down, similar to strutting in KSP?

Most of the people should be focused on replacing and coal power though, I think.

Priority 1: Coal Power
2. Decarbonize our cars
3. The rest of the hydrocarbon power plants (and it's a strong contender for #2)
4. Steel production. ....
X: Eliminate jet fuel
Y: Mining and remaining special uses.

Eliminating jet fuel should be mostly the domain of researchers. We know how to eliminate coal power - build nuclear, solar, wind.

And what are the odds that a child of "someone important" will be out on the street to be hit and killed?

Remember, while the injuries were made more severe, the person in this survived.

Death rate is remarkably low for these. Regular human drivers kill more on average. Remember, a human was the primary cause of this accident as well.

It depends a LOT on your story, but there's every possibility that you'd get by with an excuse of "I didn't know she was stuck under my car, and I was trying to move to safety". It's not like YOU know how somebody under your car would change the handling, right?

In this case, though, it looks like the corporation didn't cooperate well enough, which caused issues.

I think that right now, "Shit happened, we didn't expect this, we're adjusting the programming to take this into account." should work for most things.
1. This is what happened. Include a "why" in the programming if you can
2. Own the responsibility. Pay damages if necessary.
3. Specify that you're working on an engineering fix. If necessary, point out that its' a "hard problem" and may take some time. Actually work on said fix.

Do you know what "lambast" and "scathing" means? They might be a paid fixer, as in "fix the problem", but they don't seem to be much of a shill, given that their report led to many resignations and such for the company. Their reporting was very negative - even if they couldn't necessarily say some things were actually deliberate or not.

Just what it says. That they failed to adequately inform. That's different from not only refusing to show the video, but "refusing to this day", IE that they haven't ever handed it over.

Okay, if the NPR scrubbed that part, see why I asked? No conspiracy with Cruise necessary. You mistook essentially asking for additional citation for a denial.

Which version should I be looking at?

Because relationship management is main business of every Western governments these days. Yes, I know that's in nobody's constitution anywhere, but here we are.

I understand that the original human driver in the accident was a hit and run. If they successfully ID'd them, which might be easy if the dashcam of the Cruise car caught the license plate, they might actually be going to prison, not just a suspended license.

That said, your citation doesn't support your assertion that Cruise either lied at the press conference, or even refused to share the video. The legal firm concluded that Cruise tried, but failed to point out the importance when technical errors happened. The authorities may have received the video later.

And yes, the legal firm hired by Cruise over the incident absolutely lambasted it for having serious corporate culture problems.

Indeed it is. It's why you resort to it so quickly. Good luck with strawmanning other people!

For example, instead of stopping the machines, they'd adjust while they were still running. I'm not sure why you can't grasp this simple concept. It's dangerous, but, well, danger was the name of the game back in the day of steam powered everything. You don't need to stop the machine to straighten out the roll, not unless it's really bad. As for doing it quickly, well, that was a skill they'd develop.

And tolerances were looser back then anyways.

Back to Old Timey Matchmakers, only using AI to pick matches for us. All because we're too lazy to have human interactions ourselves.