You seem to really not care if people are killed by robotaxis, you still think people will "actually like it"

Seriously my man - you might try an approach that doesn't make you sound pathological - because you definitely do.

Trivializing deaths while claiming superior safety isn't a good look

True enough. I remember when the first Tesla fire was news. People were claiming that all EV's are fiery death traps. I even had some in here claiming that ICE vehicles almost never catch fire - they do every day.

That said, the resources that Robotaxi companies have and the need for them to claim their vehicles are the very zenith of safety, I'm expecting then throwing those resources into claiming the dead people were wrong, or NDA compensation to the non-dead family members.

Well one guy here says we'll actually like it that the kid was killed.

I agree with you. "Actually liking people getting killed was kind of a sociopathic thing for him to say.

This robotaxi thing reminds me of some years ago people were saying that the cloud was perfectly safe and secure. That one aged like milk. This one might too.

Who is liable when the Robotaxi acceptably and we like it when they kill people? I mean if we like people being killed, maybe there is no. liability, just a celebration.

Dude - yer a sociopath saying we'll actually like people being killed.

Yes, the exact hour at which the change is made is adjusted for timezone, and based off UTC (so including leap seconds).

For automated systems, they have to account for that difference when calculating DST times. It annoys users because they expect it to "just work", but unless the system knows which timezone it is in then it can't be fully automated.

It would be better to just not bother with it, and if particular groups want to have different summer and winter opening times they can do that themselves. It's not like every shop and business opens at the same time anyway.

No one is using a 30cm wide painted strip filled with gravel and missing drain covers, while cars thunder by speeding with a 20cm gap. Clearly that shows there's no demand for cycle infrastructure.

So at different times of the year, the day/night 24 hour cycle makes for differences in light and dark times.

The length of daylight at the equators does not change that much over the course of the year.

The length of daylight varies more and more as the latitude increases. Eventually, it reaches a point where there are months that the sun does not set, and months where it does not rise.

What does this lead to? People who live closer to the equator find the concept of DST/ST annoying and stupid because they are taking their situation, little difference between summer and winter daylight length.

The further north or south you go from the equator, Daylight Savings time makes more sense. Eventually the differences between summer and winter daylight become so extreme (think land of the midnight sun) that there is no compensation.

Daylight Savings time is a simple 1 hour shift back and forth to compensate for that.

Makes you wonder how the majority of the world which doesn't use DST manages to cope.

Japan should have at least two, China should have 3-4, Western Europe should be 2-3, yet they all get by with one.

Automatic changes are nice, as long as the calculation of the date and the time it happens never changes. Even within the EU, the switch over time isn't consistent - some countries are 1AM, some are 2AM, some are 3AM.

Gracious of you to make a joke that illustrates that you actually understand how braindead your original analogy was.

Marxism and its hellish offspring, communism, kind of sounds nice until you see how the incorrect assumptions at its base end up making for unprecedented human misery.

I have long said that pragmatism - which is based on demonstrable success, and adoption of what works - can take snippets from other 'isms, but never try to adopt a pure 'ism, be it communism, socialism, capitalism, libertarianism.

So here in the land so many hate, we have a lot of capitalism, a fair amount of socialism, snippets of libertarianism, and it largely works.

I dare say that listening to far left academic activists, and the abandonment of core constituents went a long way towards the shellacking the Democrats took in 2024. They need to return to more sane roots. A viable party cannot be maintained when it is inherently misandric in nature, and ignores basic science like biology. The margins of victory are too slim to cast out working class people, and men in general. You aren't going to win elections when your ideological head is Taylor Swift. Nothing personal against Taylor - she's just an entertainer deep in pop culture.

Do you know why people laugh at that kind of reasoning. Because it's so laughably wrong.

First things first, it's not a zero sum game. That money you're spending on eating out is still going to be spent on food, in part or in whole if you don't eat out. So at best you're not getting the whole lot back. Also the fact you had to extrapolate that over 30 years shows that it is a false economy. How much is inflation going to affect $50 over 30 years? Inflation alone over the last 30 years tells me that it's worth half as much, before adjusting for the rising cost of living. My first professional salary is less than minimum wage in Australia now days and that was only 20 years ago.

Secondly, you won't get a decent house for $78K today, let alone in 30 years when you've saved up that amount.

Thinking that you're going to make money by counting coppers is a total false economy, so much so that we have a saying for it in the UK, "penny wise, pound foolish". There's no point in being careful by cutting out small amounts when your rent is 10 times that. What you need to do to get ahead is to reduce your big costs. Cutting $50 a week from your rent is going to get better returns than trying to cut $50 from your food bill just because you'll realise the full amount, unfortunately society is stacked towards the land leaches.

If anything, I'd say the biggest problems people have these days are falling into credit and loyalty scheme traps.

Loyalty schemes where you spend money at the Fart store to get Fart points on you Fart card that you can redeem to get Fart flights, however it ends up being a false economy because the amount you're spending peicemeal is less, then paying additional taxes and fees is more than saving and buying your holiday outright. However the system is gamified so that people don't see the forest for the trees ("your Fart points are expiring", "you only need 100,000 more Fart points", ad nauseum).

Credit is far more insidious because it encourages people to spend beyond their means. The idea that you treat your credit card as cash, put everything on credit and then use your entire salary to pay it off each month means that you're one bad financial situation away from destitution. This has also become gamified and sadly people have fallen for the idea that banks are giving you something for free... people actually think they've "beaten" the bank with "cashback" and other schemes (erm. for those wanting to argue the bank takes it's money from the merchant and gives you a pittance back to keep you giving them more money via credit). When I was a lad, saying you lived "payday to payday" was a sign that you were in dire straights as it meant you weren't able to put money away for luxuries or unexpected bills. Now it's a sign that you're doing well as most people are living "debt repayment to debt repayment" and it will just take one disruption before they start losing things. This has become so normalised that being a net saver like me makes you an oddity.