On their own dime by continuously making things worse for everyone in the entire country until people are struggling so hard they will work 100 hours a week struggling to get access to one of those few senior developer positions that grant them the bare minimum necessities we have been taking for granted the last 60 years.

It's like that old meme poster about the pyramids. Never underestimate what you can accomplish with an endless supply of cheap disposable labor.

That's interesting and all, but since this isn't a criminal case it's not exactly on topic. If we're involved in a traffic accident and you are found at fault, you will be liable for the damages. If you crashed into me intentionally you would probably face criminal charges, but if you didn't display any sign of intent, the laws related to using a vehicle as a deadly weapon would be irrelevant to our case.

They're being sued for being complicit in the wrongful death of a teenager. They're not being taken to criminal court for failing to uphold their duty as a mandatory reporter.

If I watch you drown and do nothing, even though I'm a capable swimmer standing next to a bunch of flotation devices, and all of this is caught on camera, your family could probably sue me for causing your death even though I'm not a lifeguard and do not own the pool.

This might be harder than you think. Most of these services donâ(TM)t really know who you are or who should be notified.

And there's a reason the Inquisition burned books. Oddly, Ireland is about the only place where those that would burn the books were themselves burned in the dark ages. It's something Seneca wrote about before the dark ages and before the inquisition, off hand, can't recall the exact wording, but the conclusion is that some have a need to put others in charge of their lives so that they don't have to take responsibility for themselves and their outcomes. Sort of like the conservative meme that being poor is a choice, rather than a failure of governance to control the economic rapine of others.

Even the most casual study of divinity will show that almost all religions consider simply thinking of some things is a "sin". Almost all religions grant mankind free will, and the supreme being (call them what you may) "allows" for the "choice of sin".

So, by prohibiting "sin", they are, in effect, declaring themselves to be smarter than their Deity, who, in The Wisdom of that Deity, granted the ability to "sin".
I'm pretty sure that's not how that works.

But nobody here is buying it. His friends and family were all maga and they all said he was a good kid meeting he was maga too.

All of the memes he shared were right-wing memes and that Trump costume was a reference to Nick Fuentes' memes.

Facts don't care about your feelings. The right wing encourages violence and when you encourage violence it's random and can pop off anytime at anyone.

The left wing figured that out ages ago and figured out that violence is useless if you want to do anything worthwhile so we stopped.

Violence is explicitly the domain of the right wing. This makes sense because effective violence requires command structures and the right wing is obsessed with command structures.

Your side prefers taking orders

Extremist right-wing men and women wanted to kill Muslims and dipshit liberals reacted to that by defending Islam accidentally because it's difficult for a lot of people distinguish between Muslims and Islam.

On the other hand the same extremists depend Islam when it comes to religious apologetics.

Doesn't matter what the religion is and nobody will ever attack the religion on the merits of the religion because as soon as start handing out to do that it's going to get used against your religion too.

So we don't attack the truth claims of Islam rather we focus on its use in the promotion of violence. We also conveniently forget the Christianity did the exact same thing for thousands of years before we stopped letting Christians do that.

Sure you can. It's pretty easy actually. You just use common signal tracking tools to find where it's coming from and kill anyone you find.

Once you give your country over to religious lunatics who are willing and able and happy to use violence anything becomes possible.

It would be nice if America had figured that out last year. Sometime before November.

Eventually, yes, but you forgot a bunch of steps:

• Hide the information in a tiny little link at the very bottom of the terms and conditions that nobody reads.
• Cap the speed and/or amount of data in a way that makes the service completely unusable for 99% of real-world customers.
• Impose income limits that make the service unavailable for nearly everyone who wants to apply.
• Require such a complex application process that nobody who needs the program can figure out how to use it.

Then, after about three years, they show the government that nobody wanted $20 Internet service, and ask permission to stop providing it. And the CPUC, being an industry lapdog, quickly agrees to whatever Verizon asks for. And *then* they stop providing it.

It probably helps to use a ridesharing platform that doesn't use multiple map providers. If all your map data is from one source, you don't have these problems. It's when you start to mix multiple map providers that things go horribly and irreparably wrong, because the workarounds for one platform don't work on a different platform. Given that we're talking about Waymo, I assume Google Maps is used for everything, so I wouldn't expect those issues to occur. But no way to know without trying it at your specific location.

And note that this will change over time, but your rails can't change over time. This is the peril of rail for intracity transit.

Rails make a lot of sense in ultra-dense areas (think Manhattan, *maybe* downtown SF, but not any of the rest of the Bay Area, etc.), because the roads can't handle even a fraction of the passenger volume.

Rails also make sense for long-distance travel. If you're traveling for several hours, you probably don't want to drive that, so it is worth the inconvenience of not having a car at the other end. Also, if the trains are fast enough for their average speed to exceed the average speed of a car, then after two or three hours, you've probably broken even with the extra travel time required to get to and from those fixed endpoints.

But for the most part, rail *doesn't* make a lot of sense, because they're too much slower than air travel for long distances, and they're too much slower than cars for short distances. If you really want rail to work, we need 250 MPH (minimum) bullet trains from city to city so that they are competitive with airplanes. And provide ample parking at the termini.

Twice per hour makes a transit system borderline useless unless you are traveling for multiple hours. Your average latency is half of that, so that means on average you will waste 15 minutes waiting for every train. That means to break even, even before factoring in the extra time to get to/from the station, you need to save a whopping 15 minutes by using the train. And if you have even one connection, that makes your median latency thirty minutes. When you're wasting half an hour just waiting for the train to arrive, you're not only uncompetitive with driving; you're starting to be uncompetitive with bicycling.

Successful transit systems run avery 3 to 5 minutes during rush hour, and no more than about once every ten minutes late at night or on weekends. If you can't keep trains running at that frequency, you aren't dense enough to need a transit system, and you probably will regret putting one in. You'll end up repeatedly reducing the frequency to keep the trains at high enough occupancy to be worth doing, and then you'll be confused when ridership drops because nobody wants to wait that long for a train, and eventually you'll end up with a massively subsidized waste of taxpayer dollars like VTA.

Yup. We're well past the point where the resulting economies of scale benefit the consumer. In late-stage capitalism, economies of scale benefit the corporation and only the corporation.

Full or at typical capacity? Lots of bus routes around here average a low single-digit number of passengers for much of the route. Even single-passenger cars compare favorably to that. Assuming a diesel bus at an average of 3 MPG, you need a minimum of 15 passengers on average to break even with driving single-passenger hybrids. And that's not factoring in how much dirtier a gallon of diesel fuel is compared with a gallon of gasoline.

Means graphics from 2012 with a handful of new lighting effects and sub 60 FPS on $4,000 worth of hardware...

I mean Jesus Randy just use UE 4 and call it a day. We didn't need realistic sunlight in borderlands.