Except that's a small tip of the iceberg. The companies we would most gladly vilify as those who have done the most damage are precisely the ones who don't do the emissions themselves, but rather sell products to others who proceed to do the emitting.
Since Hyundai no longer makes cars with a stick shift
Every Hyundai with an ICE has a stick shift option. If you're lamenting not having a stick shift on an EV or a hybrid then I am also sympathetic to your view, the same way someone is sympathetic in general to people with mental handicaps.
As long as I know how fast I'm going
That sounds like great information that every car makes available to the driver on the
Plenty of people buy Teslas without instrument clusters.
Voluntarily or not? I didn't know Telsa offered it as an optional extra? I thought they just made one shitty design choice and forced it on whomever wanted the entire model.
This is an additional component.
This is putting important information in clear sight vs making the drive divert their attention from the road. Comparing it to heated seats is asinine.
And think of how many car models are out there where one trim level has a tachometer and another doesnâ(TM)t.
A tacho is not remotely important to the operation of a motor vehicle unless you're racing or off roading. How many cars do you know who don't have a spedometer on the instrument cluster?
They are giving the consumer choice.
Some choices shouldn't be available. Ever. Kind of like how we don't give people the choice of not having ABS or airbags.
I've no idea what the regulations are in Korea, but I'd be very doubtful that would be legal in the UK. The instruments need to be in clear view of the driver without them turning away from the road. Usually cheap cars get rid of the centre screen not the driver's one.
Teslas exist in the UK. It's legal. Fucking stupid, but so far legal.
What do they mean by "instrument cluster"? I'd consider the instrument cluster the thing with the speedometer, odometer, warning lights etc on it - and most of those are mandatory in most countries, so leaving it out would mean the car isn't road legal.
They are actually not mandatory in most countries to exist above the steering wheel, for one many Teslas don't have them. The information just needs to exist some where. You are spot on with what they mean though. Yes they are removing the thing that's easy to glance at and are pulling a Tesla forcing the driver to look over at the massive infotainment system
Fucking stupid.
I'm old enough to remember when delusional disorder was added to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders edition IV. It describes a recurring false believe, especially when it has been debunked over and over again such as the so called "adjustment to create warming trends"
Congrats my friend, you officially have a mental illness.
Does your atheism mean you hold values that are fundamentally opposed to the rules and laws of the society your attempting to live in?
I hope you're male because if not your husband will likely beat you like the good Christian bible commands for speaking your mind.
But I guess we're okay with committing genocide too right? After all God commanded King Saul to do just that.
Next time we go to war don't forget to to slaughter the woman and children, specifically make sure you pay attention to the pregnant woman, the bible suggested "ripping them open".
Yeah religion is so aligned with our laws and values. Hell at least God himself agreed and decided to cancel all of humanity with a flood.
It's time to kick the Christians out of Europe, they are a murderous worshiping cult not aligned with any laws.
Agreed - but this is the wrong target. They should ban computers and "smart" devices entirely, not just AI. Books and hand written tests/homework. Like you said, we already know this works.
You're being way too general. Define computer, define what software is used. Define *when* it can be put in place. Be specific. A computer is a very broad tool that does a lot of things. At what point can we assist spell checking? Do we stop teaching basic spelling at the same time we finish leaning the times table and give people basic calculators?
Note even for calculators we vary what level of complexity is introduced when. There was a specific year at school we had to switch from normal calculators to scientific calculators and then from scientific calculators to graphic calculators. That got us through to uni where graphic calculators were replaced with matlab and R. There's specific milestones related to learning materials on a per subject basis that needs to be addressed.
The GNIS is a database, one that doesn't include business in any way. It's up to the state to manage the renaming of official signage. As of right now, those street and trail signs are wrong, officially so. The business names however are right, they have no relation or requirement to follow any official naming convention.
Well this is where I'm coming from. Industrial control systems are not normally kept up to date with the latest OS. For actual control systems they are usually certified combinations of hardware and software. You don't get to upgrade Windows or Linux, what you do is buy a new database server or a new engineering workstation with the new OS on it.
RHEL isn't remotely considered the latest and greatest. I'm not sure specifically what CERN's problems were (no doubt they had many legitimate ones), I was just curious why the idea of the latest OS not running on 18+ year old hardware was a design consideration to them.
Cybersecurity is not achieved by running the latest and greatest OS. It's achieved by defence in depth. It's achieved by isolation of systems and control of information. You very much can have an OS out of date and insecure on a network if you manage that network appropriately, and I don't think anyone at CERN has their particle accelerator control system plugged directly into their ISP's router.
You "can" do a lot of things. You "can" play Doom on TI82 calculator. The question was: does it make sense to do so, what are the benefits it brings vs the downsides?
Yes but "Sam Altman said AI adoption is "non-negotiable" for countries", not "Sam Altman said AI adoption is "non-negotiable" for use in countries".
English is not math. Every reasonable person reading those two sentences interpret them the same way in the context of the discussion.
The choice to make use of AI is down to individuals, not countries.
Countries when used in this context are the implied policy of individuals. E.g. America is a piece of shit on the world stage. That doesn't mean the mountains and lakes have changed, everyone reading this sentence understands that we're talking about policies of the governing people.
To expand on my point it is very much negotiable what AI is used where.
So your point is one no one was making? No one said they had to use USA's AI. This was a comment on the industry in general.
He has come out against men playing in women sports leagues and has come out against open borders.
Which right there placing he as a supporter of genocide.
Did you accidentally leave out a sentence in the middle? I mean he supported Tommy Robinson and called him heart-warming, you know the guy who wanted to use the military to deport all brown people from the UK.
I mean Hitler is also a pretty nice guy if you gloss over parts of history. I'll give you the benefit of doubt and say you made a very stupid mistake and aren't in fact an inexcusable piece of shit like the people under discussion.
Systems programmers are the high priests of a low cult. -- R.S. Barton
