If car safety constantly improves, and speed limits are about safety, then why are speed limits are not being increased?

The purpose of car safety improvements is to reduce injuries and fatalities. Raising speed limits to compensate for improved car safety implies that the present level of injuries and fatalities is acceptable and should not be improved.

The standard deduction for a single person is $15,750. A person earning $14,500 qualifies for the Earned Income Credit and can get money from the government while paying no income tax. The employee can file a form with his employer to not have income tax deducted from his pay.

No signage at all? How many 6-year-olds near schools would that kill? No "deaf child" warnings?

Privilege, alas, has several definitions. The approximate meaning common to most definitions is "permission granted only to a select few," and applying that to driving is wrong.

Driving is a right deriving from the right of liberty generally, however it is a conditional right, limited to competent sober adults and subject to being revoked if abused.

AMD was founded in 1969, the 8080 was introduced in 1974. AMD made original designs and second source devices. AMD's distinction was that many of their devices were slightly better than the competition.

Trump's religiosity is a problem, particularly if it's genuine. However, religiosity is widespread in the U.S., and the damage it does is limited, so you can't conclude that it always leads to bad results.

The bleach claims have long been established as a hoax created by selective editing and malicious promotion. Neither believing that hoax, nor promoting it regardless of belief, is wise behavior.

A six pound meteorite might sell for thousands or possibly hundreds of thousands of dollars. Multiple millions is very unlikely, even if it is fresh, highly publicized, and well documented.

In theory, it's universal theft. In practice, it's dictatorship and widespread poverty.

There appears to be no investigation...

https://med.stanford.edu/news/...
and many others.

There is continuing work in discovering/developing chemicals that promote the creation and development of new neurons. Such new materials help; using your brain is of course essential.

Most scientific discoveries benefit humanity, even if it's discovering "this doesn't work." Most modern scientific discoveries are made by professional scientists. They are making the world better for almost everybody, and they deserve to be rewarded for their accomplishments. They earn their privileges.

The Dark Ages were caused by Christians being more interested in their god than in retaining and advancing scientific and technical knowledge. The consequent human suffering is a matter of historical record. If the incentives (including privileges) to advance science are removed, science will atrophy again and humans will suffer again.

We are not living in a feudal time. By and large, the "class" we end up in is the one we earn. In most places, a fixed "class" (excepting those 0.01% at the top) is a fiction.

It's astonishing and delightful that films on this unstable base are still recoverable. Many old films have been destroyed because they were too dangerous to keep around and too degraded for commercial recovery to be worthwhile.

From your citation, the slightly sweeter Pepsi tastes better with just one sip, but Coke tastes better if a whole can is consumed.

For me, the results are different for diet colas. They all taste terrible, but Tab and Diet Coke are the worst. Diet Pepsi and Diet RC taste about the same and are almost tolerable.

High mileage tires have been available for decades. As always, there are tradeoffs. Lower wear means poorer traction, and probably a harsher ride.

The ability to see flicker at rates faster than the eye's optical response time may be due to saccades. You're sensing a bunch of discrete dots due to the eye's micro-motions.

I use a 42" 4k monitor and it's a delight for computers. More resolution and size might be useful.

For real-life video, more than 4k runs into problems because of the limitations of optics. Except for scenes at infinity focus, or other very flat images, only a small portion of the scene will be in sharp focus and that focus will be difficult for the camera/cinematographer to maintain. Only very good optics even has the capability much beyond 4k. The effort is wasted.