Bored drivers are a safety hazard and must be eliminated. If you've ever driven for 4 hours without so much as a car radio you'd realise how dangerous it is. Maybe not to others, but to yourself because you'll likely just look for the nearest tree to drive into after the first 3 hours of nothing but engine noise.

I thought so too at first, but wholly shit was I wrong, and now having a car with Google Built-in is a must feature for me from the moment I used it in a Volvo. It's like Android Auto except it works. Always. Without a phone. No disconnecting, no wire or wireless bullshit, no "why the fuck is my phone not showing up in the list" rubbish.

Also Google doesn't "handle the tech", just the backend. It's still largely in control of the car manufacturers except down to individual apps (and having actual real Google Maps, or Waze, or whatever you want to download from an App store is orders of magnitude better than whatever shit car makers used to push in the past).

GM uses Google Built-In. You don't need Android Auto for this. The experience is already largely synced by your google account. I use Android Auto everywhere, except for my own car which has Google Built-in as the primary interface. It's like Android Auto except native, fast, and works without the damn phone.

That said Apple users, you're left in the dust, but then if you have a GM car you should be used to this. Apple CarPlay has always been abysmal or non-existent on GM vehicles.

Why? I mean really why would they do anything other than they have done. They took the obvious path of least resistance and the rule is now being reviewed. Why would anyone start with the longest and most complicated process rather than the simplest and potentially fastest?

Is this like the Americans putting the day of the month after the month, as in not knowing that the logical approach to everything is to go from smallest to biggest?

Citation Needed. To be clear it sounds like what you're saying is right, but the reality is we don't make decisions like this based on the feels which is precisely why a detailed study has been commissioned.

Add to that - most responses to break down are low-IQ even from supposedly smart people I would wager very few responses to such situations are resolved organically rather than "God fucking dammit now I need to place this thing 100ft behind me due to regulations, grrrrrr."

I did read the whole section. One thing America is infamously known for is it's long straight roads, your claim that truckers need to trek 300 feet is ignorant or dishonest. Most don't.

Not sure how you get to "300 bloody feet". That bit where it says the rules are "exacting" in TFS, is a link to the actual rules. It's 100feet. That's pretty damn close to a truck. In fact that's just a couple of meters longer than b-double truck.

That is a statement that has been repeated in literally every jurisdiction around the world many times as fuel standards have changed over the years. Several companies have even tried this, the governments called them out on their bluff, and then laughed at them as they spent money upgrading their refineries as it turned out the "liquid gold" they used to sell became "liquid lead" thanks to regulations.

California is a big market for gasoline. Precisely no company will pull out of it over this. They may manufacture elsewhere to keep costs down, but it won't impact the pump pricetag. There's money to be made.

Blending is simple. Keeping costs down via blending is complex. Fixing an off spec tank is far more expensive than just getting the blend right out of the refinery in the first place. There's no economic incentive to do what the GP said.

That's not easy. The blending components that keep a fuel to a stringent spec are typically more expensive to produce, and if you need to "fix" a blend rather than get it right the first time it becomes very expensive since it causes you to overshoot on a large range of requirements.

A typical example is Alkylate, it's often referred to as liquid gold. Gasoline engines could run on it alone, and it can be blended into any offspec tank to fix the blend. However it is also the lowest yield and most expensive to produce gasoline blending component in a refinery so refineries go absolutely out of their way to use as little of it as possible.

Producing fuel for a neighbouring state and then fixing it via blending is far more expensive than just doing it right the first time.

Please stop saying it. It was dumb the first time and it's no less dumb the following times. We all know why you post AC, because you don't believe your own bullshit. Please get a real job and tell whomever is paying you to run this nonsense to fuck off.

Also to the point: The statistics you linked shows that on Linux Firefox has a 55% market share. That doesn't mean that the customer base runs a 55% market share. A not insignificant number of people will be doing this exam on Windows and Mac. Just because the exam is hosted by Canonical and is about Linux doesn't mean they run only on Linux. I use a world of tools at work and am certified in a world of things that are just not relevant in my home. And even here I have a mix of Linux and Windows desktops, which is something I'd also have if I were (I'm not) a system admin.

I would not assume that that 55% statistics is reflective of who will visit the website. That would be very dumb application of statistics without any thought.

They are aware, they did test, and they explicitly state it will work on the exam. It's just the preview system that doesn't. Of course it doesn't help that OP only quoted half the sentence.

You're looking at this from a single variable. Efficiency for a unit of person may peak at 36h/week but not necessarily for an organisation. There is a big cost to changing staff, hiring, firing, training. As such if I have a job that needs doing now and I have the choice it may well be cheaper and more effective to get the work done using 3 employees at 60h/week rather than employing 2 additional workers, training them, having the team work for 36h/week and then firing the 2 at the end.

This has nothing to do with software. It was the school resource officer who called the police even after it was reported as a false positive.

This is why vigilante justice sucks, you're so ready to put the wrong person's head on a stake. The software unicorn developed software with flags, with human review, and the operator of the software correctly flagged the report as false.