If all the infotainment system does is interface with the phone, there's less in it to break. Also a lot less to bit-rot when the manufacturer loses interest in updating (as they all do).

The issue is not that the climate has changed - it has, and it will continue to do so - but what we're going to do about it. No matter what the crisis, the solution always seems to be greater government control. Usually at the cost of our way of life.

What part of NO do you not understand?

...laura

It's gotten a bit confused over the years. At one time, an average student could expect a C. Calling someone a C student wouldn't have been much of an insult. A D student was under-performing. The real shame was at the point of D-.

But then, starting in grade school, parents expected A's and B's even from objectively average students. A's were for students who might even be at a point where they might skip a grade. Kids started betting grounded for too many C's and eventually for any Cs at all.

That's not to say it was all perfect. There was a certain un-fairness to grading on a curve per class rather than over an established history of classes. An average student who found themselves in an exceptionally bright class might get a D or an F in spite of being objectively average. The F being especially unfair as a small change in fate might have gotten them a C or even a B for the same performance if they happened to be in a more average class or even below average class. It just wasn't that good of a predictor for later real world performance.

A million little girls want a pony.

Right, in other words, third world bargaining tactics.

I make a few reasonable inferences that don't involve magic. Meanwhile you invent active shooters with no shots fired and no gun present. I'm pretty sure they didn't use divining rods or the magic 8-ball to locate the kid in question. The picture was obviously available (since it is documented that it was shown to the kid). It's documented that the kid was cuffed and on his knees. It's documented that there never was a gun.

The "gun" turning out to be Doritos must have been fairly obvious since when the kid pointed it out, he was not arrested and taken away.

It's also obvious that had they looked at the picture FIRST, the kid wouldn't have even known they were there (nor would anyone but the principal and perhaps a few others in the office).

You can feel free to lick as many boots as you like, but leave me out of it. If the police want respect, they'd best get busy earning it.

So you figure they were waving ostrich feathers at him threatening to tickle?

Do you think the only actual guns in the school at the time didn't loom large in the kid's vision?

How do you suppose they picked out the "right" student to hassle without a picture?

In the before time when I was in high school, searching for weapons was a job for the unarmed principal or the football coach. Either they had the picture on them or they held the kid WAY longer than necessary after the pat down revealed nothing.

The parents should sue the crap out of the cops, the school, and probably the manufacturer of the scanner.

Agreed, the actual publication is considerably more ambiguous. In my case, 2K really would be about the max, but I can easily see other people would have a good case for 4K.

Though notably they're talking about ability to discern the difference in an A/B test. A somewhat lesser display may still make no difference in the 'experience' of normal watching, but that would require a follow-up study.

The AI would be better at feigning human decency.

You're the one who suggested the dispatcher should have looked. They showed the student the picture while they had him on his knees at gunpoint in the cafeteria.

You're getting desperate.

The 27" screen was just for measuring the true pixels/degree resolution for human eyes.

Or at least replace Trump with an AI.

They had the picture of the alleged gun that was clearly not a gun. That's a DAMNED good reason to doubt he had a gun. They were just too fucking stupid to look at the picture. Too stupid to be allowed to carry a firearm. I agree that there was plenty of stupid to go around. Yes, the dispatcher should have looked, especially since the information came from an error prone AI. The whole lot of them should be re-assigned somewhere where they can't hurt anyone. Not picking up trash, that involves a pointy stick.

It's funny that the one person in the whole story who didn't demonstrate poor decision making was the TEENAGER.

I would suggest that a passenger look at the picture, or they look at the picture before they decide to endanger everyone on the road by driving like a clown for no reason.

I never claimed it was the basics of police training. It is the basics of the society's expectation. You know, the people that ultimately pay them. I would think that making references to things learned in kindergarten and Sunday school would have made that clear.

As for sorry, by the time you actually kill an innocent person (at best negligent homicide), you are probably beyond a simple sorry. But in this case, the kid is right there. A public apology is in order.

It's funny that the much better trained and disciplined military police behave so much more professionally and courteously in spite of being primarily soldiers prepared to go into an actual war zone where killing people is in the job description.

Of course, if they thought about it a minute (not their strong suit), AI would be gone in a flash since THEY are the ones best replaced with AI.

The desire for a lower friction less of a pain in the ass economy. The desire not to waste all that effort and energy across the whole economy? A sense of fair dealing and basic honesty? A desire to keep Mr. Haney from Green Acres firmly in the realm of comedic satire?