because you can choose to go where you want whenever you want.

But you can't actually. You're legally limited on where you can drive, where you can stop, where you can get out, and where you can leave it - either when you can do those things or if you can do them at all. You have to stay within range of a gas or charging station. Etc.

And if so much time is saved by using a personal vehicle, why can people not take a few more seconds to pull out or a few more minutes to stop somewhere safe and change settings?

I think what's going on is that most people don't actually like driving/being in a personal vehicle - that's why they try to get it over with as quickly as possible. (The part I don't get is the insisting that they love it. Like we can just admit that our car-centric society sucks, and most people consider personal vehicles the least sucky way to deal with it.) They look at how public transit and ride shares/taxis sometimes take longer, and imagine it's like being in a personal vehicle but longer. Most complaints about public transit are not intrinsic to public transit, but are symptoms of bad public transit. In places with decent and good public transit, transit stops are closer to destinations than parking lots, you don't have to wait very long, etc. Trains are faster than cars, and in places with bus-only lanes (that are actually enforced) buses sometimes are too.

And then there's the fact that, good or bad, on public transit (and in ride shares/taxis, and while waiting for them), you don't have to deal with the stress of driving and can safely do whatever you want - read, nap, play a video game, watch something, adjust the settings on your personal devices without stopping, etc. etc. If other people are going with you, everyone with you can be mentally present, interact, look at the scenery (vs in a personal vehicle the driver has to focus on driving) etc. So it isn't wasted time in the same way driving is, it's leisure time. (If you asked me if I'd rather drive for 20 minutes or read/game/relax/talk to my kids or friends for an hour, I'm picking the hour every time. Not that that's actually the choice most of the time.) Walking or biking to/from public transit stops (or to/from your destinations) means less time you have to set aside for exercise (or it means being healthier, for the people that don't set aside time for exercise at all)... and it's - dare I say - enjoyable. I bike or walk even on days I have nowhere to go. I travel to places specifically to bike and walk and take transit, and actually see places rather than staring at the backs of cars. I'm less limited on where I can go and when, and enjoying life more than when I used a personal vehicle.

The danger is because you (and your friend) are starting to go too fast. You're supposed to take your time, make sure all systems are functioning correctly, make sure everything is set how it's wanted, and then make sure everything's clear and start to go. If you want to change some settings, you're supposed to stop somewhere safe and do so. If it's awhile before you get somewhere safe to stop... you're supposed to wait.

I don't quite get why people insist they love personal vehicles, yet put themselves and others in danger to decrease the amount of time spent in them as much as they can.

I mean, in the US we have lottery vending machines. I guess the fact that they can't redeem winnings (except on more tickets/cards) might dissuade minors, if they realize that, but they could get someone else to redeem it for them if they win...

We also have cigarette vending machines... nowadays you rarely find those anywhere people under 21 are allowed (unlike the lottery vending machines), but I don't know if that's because it didn't work (like, a kid picking up cigarettes for their parents didn't use to be a big deal, the problem would be if they were smoking them) or because of the idea that it wouldn't work.

So point it at some other accounts too, with a timer so you have time to change them if those people get fired before you do. You could make it look like a maintenance thing that was just poorly coded.

I'm not sure why Linux detractors so consistently use outdated information about this. Have you tried Linux in the past ~5 years? Steam (even with non-Steam games), Lutris, and Heroic have made it easy, and games run better when the hardware is able to be used to run the game instead of running the bloat of Windows.

Some specific games won't run on Linux due to the anti-cheat, but almost all gamers can do without those games (and if they would for a little while and say why, more developers would make them run on Linux).

I'm a hardcore gamer, with a family of gamers of differing computer ability. We play recent games as well as old games. Although we used Windows for decades because of that, Linux is now used exclusively in my house.

All car owners are cash cows.

Then you can update it via USB instead. You have a car that has OTA updates, keep it in a place where there is no signal, and don't know this? Wasn't it in the manual?

Yes. And then after 3 months you return, and you update the car before driving it anywhere. (If the place you left the car doesn't have coverage, you can use USB instead of OTA.)

Are y'all misunderstanding this to mean the updates will only be available for 45 days? I guess I shouldn't be surprised that drivers can't read, but damn.

He said they use things like perplexity instead. I had to look it up but -

Perplexity is a free AI-powered answer engine

"We"? I don't. There is not, has never been, and never will be any version of Windows that has Recall in my home nor on my network (nor any version of Windows at all from now on, Recall was just the final straw).

Those that do put up with it, it's because they have something akin to Stockholm syndrome, or whatever makes people stay in abusive relationships, or maybe it's akin to addiction. They're convinced they need Microsoft and things would be worse without Windows, so tell themselves whatever Microsoft does isn't so bad, or it's not Microsoft's fault (the thing the user disabled was accidentally re-enabled, Microsoft didn't mean it!) or they can trust Microsoft now even though they couldn't before (it'll be different this time - things won't be re-enabled nor exploited by nefarious people even though there's a track record of that happening!).

And every time I point this out, there are people that argue with me that no, they actually need Microsoft.

like we've already been doing for years on Linux with Lutris.

It's funny how people will say "People want this, because it's easier!" and also "People don't want to use Linux, because it's harder!"

Nobody knows what's best for you. People have their opinion on what is best but that's just what's best for them. That's why they don't agree. If you say what you want and what you're used to, someone can tell you what's "best", but then you'll be disappointed and put off Linux if that one distro isn't best for you or doesn't work the way you want. You have to try some and see what you think is best. There is no harm in trying multiple.

Why, when that's another point in favor of switching in my book? I mean, you can choose whatever distro is exactly right for you/your user; simple or complicated, full control or inability to break anything, looks and works like Windows if that's what you want (whatever version of Windows you want) or looks/works nothing like Windows if that's what you want. Why do people not want choice and freedom?

I recall watching a movie where some thugs crash a party where a bunch of rich people were and he demanded everyone hand over wallets, jewelry, and cell phones. That movie was from 1995, and even with the movie that old I thought the phones back then would have the ability for remote disabling.

I always thought the point of that was so that nobody called the cops before they were gone. Bricking aside, I don't know how useful stolen cellphones would have been in 1995? Compared to today when everyone has one so there's a market for working used parts, and you can easily get paid for recycling them.

Also put cloud in the name, sure, that'll make everyone feel better. Just look at another child's toy, CloudPets. And that was only audio recordings. If something like that happens with these video recordings (because we all know Nintendo isn't immune to data breaches) it'll just be the parents' fault for buying the camera and letting their kid use "cloud chat" in the first place. Even if they weren't aware of the risks because people are afraid to talk about it since everyone that tries is accused of being a perv who wants to get nude on a children's toy.