If you set it to "85th percentile of observed traffic" you are selecting 15% to be targets of fines. Why 15 and not 20, or 10?

States with "reasonable and prudent" rather than "explicit speed limits" do a more logically consistent job here. Reasonable and prudent is what we're really looking for - everyone choose a speed that is safe for the conditions of the road, the vehicle, and the surrounding traffic.

The problem is that it's difficult to fine people for that, because it is partly subjective and different for every driver and weather conditions. It's much easier to set an explicit speed limit and then measure speeds. Explicit speed limits exist for the convenience of the courts, with safety of the road users as a distant secondary objective.

If you want to improve safety, then look into "traffic calming" measures. In particular those that cause drivers to perceive higher risk (and research into conditions where drivers falsely perceive lower risk). Even just drawing the lines narrower on a wide street can have an effect. If you design the road right, drivers will naturally choose the right speed for the environment without any need for a road nanny.

Funny that your subject line is a modification of the Star Trek catchphrase... which was well-known for having an extremely diverse crew, especially for the time when it was made. I love it when people think Star Trek wasn't what today would be called woke.
So we've got two things going on here not sure which one it is, either this is the classic, 90% of conversations w/ leftists is them pretending to misunderstand common phrases making dialog impossible or just another person ignorant of what classic trek was like and did. So assuming(dangerous, I know) it is not the first scenario(which would make the rest of this reply pointless), in season 3 episode 22, "The Savage Curtain", space Abraham Lincoln uses an archaic term to describe Uhura, and then apologizes immediately afterwards, to which Uhura replies it is merely a word and they've(humanity) moved beyond it. How could any rational being believe that the sentiment I've just described could be attributed to the modern thought police: words are violence, silence is violence, failure to respect my pronouns is violence aka "woke" is truly baffling.

The Democrats could run Jesus fucking Christ and it wouldn't do any good if the Republicans just stop 17 million people from voting.
One point of contention, I don't want people voting, I want citizens voting, and there is a distinction. I'd prefer they were alive as well, but no need to totally destroy the Democrat party all at once.

No. To make it illogical, all I would have to do is to show that the only way to get to zero is to get rid of plastics. That getting rid of plastics would result in disease, famine and plague, and wipe out a large part of humanity. That is how you get to ZERO.
Thinking that this is a number that should be aimed for is retarded. We should care about the levels. We should care about where in the body we find it and we should care about finding out what levels cause what problems.
More facts, more science, less proselytizing.

Sadly, I can not refute your statement out of hand.
I wish that I could.

How exactly are we going to do that?
That statement is not logical, it is evangelical.
Plastics are an incredibly important, irreplaceable part of our world. If they disappeared, the effect would be catastrophic.
Do I want to be drinking and eating tons of microplastics? No. That seems fucking stupid.
Should be Zero though is the statement of a person doing damage control to push a narrative that might be endangered by a new fact.
This is not even saying that the new measurements will put us at low numbers. It might not.
Anne McNeil here though is worried that the data might make this mountain into a mole hill and running pre interference. That is not science. That is activism.

I knew someone pushing this shit a few years ago and claiming it was "therapy." She got arrested for dealing (other) drugs and then fled the country after making FALSE accusations at a number of people...

Grok was constantly say it was doing something that it had ZERO ability to, and I kept calling it out and it kept apologizing and then immediately doing it again.

As a guy who spend 5 figures a year on Ai, the last thing I want is that. I know Claude and ChatGPT also do it, but Grok was doing it CONSTANTLY.

Ah, the enlightened centrist. You can't name one "forceful" Biden era piece of legislation.
Says the guy posting as anon coward. But anyways, assuming you are not a troll and just a person with the memory of a goldfish, I'll start with the COVID19 restrictions under Biden(where BLM protests were ok, and Hollywood films could be shot, but no going to Church or any other large gatherings, gyms had to be closed). We will then move onto the power grab that was simply forgiving everyone's college debt. And for even more unity I'll present Biden's sith lord speech from Sep 1st 2022. But maybe you aren't a dog faced pony soldier, I can't be sure.

From the story it appears that some bloke sent a threatening email to the girlfriend of one Kashyap Patel
FTFY

He has killed thousands of Iranians, cost the global economy trillions of dollars, cost the taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars, ruined the US's reputation as a dependable and reliable partner, and effectively made the rule of law meaningless... but the exact same regime that does horrible things to Iranians is still in power so... winning?
I do love watching Democrats who spent years w/ their "Slava Ukraini" and blockbuster pins, wanting to ship pallets of cash to Ukraine, start to notice that wars are expensive. It is truly hilarious. Almost as funny as watching the Anti-war left completely disappear once Obama took office. Also, I missed your moral outrage when the Iranian regime killed thousands of Iranians, but maybe I just didn't look at /. that day. As for dependable and reliable partner, you misspelled carry the load completely. After all, going to war without the French, is like going hunting w/out an accordion.

This supercharged the crisis of 2007-2008. not sure there was many articles written about it, but the patterns are the same.
No, that was supercharged by the easy credit loans, and then the subsequent bundling of said loans into CDOs that could be sliced and sold off as low risk despite the loans inside said CDOs being sub prime, and some of those loans were interest only such that the second the rates started to rise, the risk of default exploded. Same kind of imaginary thinking that goes on in the crypto world, "the line must keep going up."

It really is simple. Rust zealotry is 100 percent fact and provable.
Ubuntu 25.10.
What is a foundational tenet of Linux? "We do not break user-space."
But, we do for Rust. Why? Because Rust MUST move forward at speed. Can't pass tests? Fuck it. Works good enough.
Breaks user-space? Yes, but not all the time and not for most people. We are accepting Rust CoreUtils for no other reason that it must be.
It has been decreed. Ubuntu about CoreUtils is Bill, "Fuck it, we'll do LIVE!".
Large performance hiccups, failing tests? Does not matter. Pushing it live will bring the issues to light and we can fix it all over time.
What? That is not how this has ever worked. We do not break user-space. Especially on purpose so we can speed up Rust development.
Rust replacements should exist. Rust replacements should make there way into the systems we are using every day to make things more secure. Rust replacements should work though and not break user-space. If is not an acceptable replacement if it were written in C, then it is not one just because it is written in Rust. Real commands, real scripts, real jobs fail. Anything that works as a drop in replacement should be accepted. (Preferably because it is provably better, not just, "Written in Rust though!". Anything that does not, should not be a default in the release and should stay in the background, getting better till it is ready.

Anything other than that is religious zeal, not making a better Linux.

The same company that banned people for linking to the British Holocaust Museum (HMD.Org.UK) claiming the links were violations of the policy on "dangerous individuals and organizations." Zuckerberg is a pedophilic little-boy-raping sick-trash Nazi.

Because then it would not be religious zealotry? :)