Nothing moved, I want autonomous cars to be as safe as good drivers like I said in the first place, I don't want autonomous cars being as dangerous as the set of people including drunk and tired drivers. No change, same reason safety AND accountability reasons, with corporations running the show there will be less accountability and less safety that's a given.

So if the technology is demonstrably safer than 99% of drivers and results in a comparable reduction in deaths, youâ(TM)d still be opposed to it?

If someone drives drunk and kills someone then they can be arrested and potentially imprisoned. You can't arrest an autonomous car and the responsibility for any deaths will be too far removed - no-one will be arrested, there won't be enough deterrent to stop companies from putting shoddy autonomous systems on the road.

So yes, I don't want autonomous cars on the road that aren't far safer than your average driver when that average includes people that shouldn't be driving and aren't driving legally.

If an autonomous car could be shown to be safer than a professional driver with years of experience that isn't tired or under the influence of alcohol or drugs then I'd be happy for that car to be on the road. But I would not be happy if the bar was set so low as that the car is barely be safer than drunk or tired drivers. I would also not be happy if the allowing the car to drive in all weather conditions on all roads if it had only achieve a good record driving only on easy roads in daylight in good weather conditions. etc.

PS I have also heard of a theoretical intriguing device that consists of gyroscopes configured in such a way that they could cause lift within a box without violating any laws of physics including the laws of thermodynamics. It is simply a quirk of physics and gyroscopes used in such a way as to cause lift, no laws of nature violations because of the amount of energy needed.

I've since tried finding sources but never had any luck.

Unless said machine runs off a battery and uses more energy to raise a device than sticking a battery with a motor on a vertical rail.

So the machine would not be perpetual motion because you could not gain back more than it took to lift the device.

If he leaves it in the garage he should get his insurance adjusted for like 500 miles per year. (I assume it comes out _sometimes_ or he wouldn't need to register or insure it at all...)

And if he then drives 50K miles the next year, should he backpay the insurance company more money for that year?

They've just gotta make it clear to people that they're not allowed to cut the turbines in to little pieces and eat them.

What, exactly, is Google supposed to recommend when viewed in incognito mode?

Videos, Youtube should recommend videos.

What other content site is blank on the home page without links to content, can you imagine going to a news site that doesn't link news and instead just provides you with a search prompt, no, because that is absurd and what Youtube is doing here is also absurd. They could show most popular videos, music videos, trending videos, news videos, sport videos, tech videos, cat videos, etc etc.

The new idiot management is David Zaslav who is an arsehole who has already pissed off Christopher Nolan enough that Oppenheimer is a hit for Universal Pictures and not WB. That has cost WB hundreds of millions alone.

The developers have responded saying they can simply re-publish their games but the downside is they have to re-make a new store page and previous players will likely lose some functionality such as the ability to share screen-shots.

"there must be more to the story" Implies there are not idiots making this decision, idiots exist and many are in management, this is a stupid decision that will prevent developers ever wanting to use WB as a publisher in the future and it fucks gamers over for no reason good enough to make public.

"In a serious war"

So, not a war against Russia then? Is the War in Ukraine not a serious war?

That is the worst argument ever, ISIS could use that argument for destroying ancient monuments - "there are plenty of other ancient monuments to look at, what does it matter if we destroy these ones.

Also it is unlikely that buyers of the games would lose them from their Steam libraries, the games would just be delisted from the Steam store and multiplayer would likely stop working. The games would still be playable for people who already purchased them asides from the multiplayer aspects.

Except that's badly worded because they are only the publisher and they don't own the games, thankfully the developers own the games, this is just a publisher being as shitty as it can get.

So, both an massive arsehole and an idiot at the same time, anyone with half a brain would realise that these decisions are money losers. Share holders should be asking for CEOs head before they do more damage.

https://www.theguardian.com/en...

Melting Greenland etcs ice so fast will likely cause an ice age and the scientists say the climate could flip fast. "The Day After Tomorrow" may not have been so inaccurate after all.