Linden Labs have provided content creators (that is, the population of users who comprise Second Life) much more power over who can do what on their "land". As a result, most places are civilized now. Only group members of a region can create objects on that land; there are limits to how many objects can be rezzed at one time (so anyone who does manage to engage in griefing will be limited in scope); abusive activity is much more quickly curtailed.
Of course you can still find flying penises, not to mention sex with goats, snuff games, a thriving sex slave industry and the like but you have to actively go searching for it.
Right, because it doesn't appeal to activities you consider important, it just doesn't make sense that it would appeal to anyone else on the planet. Are that many people really not as enlightened as you?
Just for grins you might try reading TFA, and learn something about why it's still popular enough to be profitable for Linden Labs.
You joke, but I really wonder about the double standard. They would have us believe that pictures or statues featuring full frontal nudity are for whatever reason inappropriate. OK, I can live with that. I know what it's like to be a parent waiting to have "the talk" with my kids on my timetable, not when some random social media site decides it's time.
And yet... it's somehow magically inoffensive if that giant schlong is centuries old? Allow nude art or don't allow it, but don't try to have it both ways just because a ninja turtle signed the work.
You missed the part where they also have a checkbox asking:
Are you here as a terrorist to cause harm to American lives or property?
The TSA is putting all their money on this plan working.
Exactly. Just like my namesake said, follow the money.
Fake news is ridiculously profitable from an advertising point of view. Headlines and stories that rile people up, fuel their confirmation bias, are addictive; people will keep coming back to your site for more and share links to your site on social media to bring in more addicts. All so you can rake in the cash selling ads that target a growing audience.
Attempting to up the hype a bit
Please don't. The paper contains a wildly speculative idea which, while technically possible, is based on a single, unconfirmed experimental result.
This. The first thing I noticed in TFA (I know, that was my first mistake) was the headline leading with "Physicists confirm"... and then trailing off -- before the end of the headline! -- into speculative weasel words like "possible", "if true", "may be", etc. Which is it, phys.org? Did scientists confirm it, or is it just a possible discovery?
Then people wonder why scientific discoveries are so badly misreported.
So you're saying that there's no truth to this story? Where's you're evidence? You have none? Then why should I believe your negative spin?
Always a clever tactic to demand an explanation and then triumphantly declare that the other person has none before any time has passed for replies to be made. Here, let me help you with that "missing" evidence. Have you missed the news for the past eight years? The F-35 program has been dogged at every step by cost overruns, test failures, design-by-committee creeping features, etc.
I could go on all day, but you get the idea. Just google "F-35" + "waste" + "failure".
Go Los Angeles and there are some freeway offramps marked 25 MPH
Are those actual, legally enforced speed limits (black lettering on white background) or advisory speed limits? It makes a difference in court. The former can get you a ticket if you exceed it; the latter is just a commonsense guideline ("If you have any brains at all, you'll slow down to 25 to take this exit/curve/whatever"). You can't get a ticket for going faster than the advisory speed limit, but your insurance company can use it against you if it can be proven that you were going too fast at the time of the accident.
I realize that the OP's suggestion ("programmed to avoid getting in accidents and nothing else") was ridiculously oversimplified, but... that's no less ridiculous than the "dilemmas" presented in the game.
Scenario 1: Crash directly into a concrete barrier or into a crowd of people and cats. Really, there are no other possible outcomes at all? Not rapid controlled deceleration, not swerving off the road, nothing else comes to mind?
Come back to me when you have *realistic* scenarios.
Personally, I don't like the acceleration very much unless I can get captioning to work at the accelerated speeds (works great on my Roku; on DVDs not so much). Instead I just fast-forward through the predictable boring scenes -- skip 5 minutes of scenic driving here, 2 minutes of overhead establishing shot there, 10 minutes of chopsocky fight scene, upwards of 15 minutes of characters agonizing over some trivial emotional trainwreck that doesn't advance the plot... I can easily see a movie or TV episode in half the production time just by skipping past the filler scenes that I don't care about.
You know what would be a hugely profitable business? Providing TL;DR (or is that TL;DW) truncated versions of movies.
I have a 2013 Prius, and that's been a constant problem.
On at least one occasion (that I know of), I was able to exit the vehicle and enter my house, taking my key with me, and even without the presence of the key the car remained in reverse. It was only the fact that it was parked on a slight upward (to the rear) incline with cinder blocks as a barrier (it's a rural neighborhood with no paved driveway or parking area, don't judge me) that prevented it from continuing to idle backwards into the outside stairwell in front of the house.
On at least one other occasion, I started to get out only to find the car continued moving backwards because it was not clearly signaling that it was still in reverse.
At the very least, they should prevent motion when the key is moved away from the vehicle.
It would be suicidal of them to implement ads though.
Some of us are old enough to remember when the whole point of cable TV was that by paying a fixed fee every month, we were spared the annoyance of ads.
It'll come. Sooner or later, probably sooner, streaming content will be just as ad-choked and invasive as broadcast TV and cable/dish services.
A large number of installed systems work by fiat. That is, they work by being declared to work. -- Anatol Holt