MonkRome @ MonkRome @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

328

Joined

2 yr. ago

At stop signs, or right turns at lights, most vehicles roll through slowly instead of coming to a complete stop, basically the exact same action a bike takes. At least where I live it's perfectly legal for bikes to run stop signs, so long as it wouldn't be anyone else's right of way. But it's not legal for cars to do it, yet they mostly do.

Edit: passing through a red on a bicycle or motorcycle is also legal in most places with proximity sensors so long as no one else has the right of way. Many lights have proximity sensors that fail to detect bikes, so they have to let it happen or you could be stuck at a light until a car comes.

Sure, but most car drivers also fail to come to a complete stop as well.

Corporations might be largely at fault but regular people can keep voting with their dollars. Corporations have to adjust to demand.

Most of the top polluters in the world are fossil fuel producers. Want to slow them down? Stop driving ice vehicles, take public transit, bike, walk, move closer to work, or unionize and put work from home in your contract. Reduce in home energy waste, if you own a home: improve insulation, check heat loss around the edge of windows, look into solar panels. Most of these things improve you life anyway, lowering your monthly costs makes your life better.

Lobby, get involved in your community, organize.

While it's true that large corporations are major polluters, our continued actions (and inaction) give them the money and power to keep polluting.

Good point to clarify.

Failure to id is a secondary crime, you first need to be lawfully detained/lawfully suspected of a crime, before id can be demanded in 24 states. In the remaining states you need to be arrested before id can be demanded. Driving a motor vehicle is different though. As long as an officer had a reasonable reason for pulling you over, they can id you even if you dispell their suspicions prior to providing ID. If you're pulled over, it's best to always provide ID.

So it's only a lawful order if the police follow the law, if they just walk down the street randomly asking people for id, then failure to comply with their unlawful demands can be thrown out by the courts. Of course the police can just lie and make up a reason they suspected you of a crime, which is why some states have made things like "smelling marijuana" not enough on it's own.

In my admittedly anecdotal experience I regularly hear people arguing a point I made, that days earlier they were fervently fighting against. Either I'm incredibly persuasive, or I think it's really just ego. People can't admit they're wrong, even if they 100% know you are right. Once they forget they had their ego tied into your argument, they seem to often accept new information.

My ancestors were Jewish, they were chased out under threat of death. Absolutely repugnant to claim I'm mad about dead Nazis in that context.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excess_mortality_in_the_Soviet_Union_under_Joseph_Stalin

Stalin's actions killed 7-20 million people, intellectuals, minorities, and poor people. At least a million of which were deliberate deaths. People who defend that for political expedience are unquestionably misinformed or evil, take your pick. My family was fleeing for their lives.

I am all for some form of socialism, defending evil people is not how you get it.

So when Stalin collaborated with Nazis to kill and chase away my relatives from what is now Ukraine that was imperialist propaganda? Why did so many of my ancestors flee Russia at that time?

Disappointed that I have not seen every song Dave Matthews has ever sung listed in here.

I agree they should expand their review protest to all games in the catalog and not selectively review bomb. Consumers have every reason to impact products success through their purchasing power and reviews. I stopped giving my money to game companies I don't like a decade ago. It means missing some games, but there is so much out there it hardly matters. I don't give a shit about this specific controversy, but I do think people have every reason to use their bully pulpit to attempt to impact consumer habits and therefore at least attempt change, even if they are often unsuccessful.

Let's try this logic on other things. Their EULA says they can cut off a finger whenever they want. They haven't cut off my finger for my purchase of this game, call me back when they cut it off.

If you're someone that doesn't want companies to have root level access to your computer, waiting until it happens is silly when they're telling you it's gonna happen. It is every reason to complain and be concerned.

Most Jews don't live in Israel. 18 million Jews, 7 million live in Israel. The way you framed your comment doesn't really make sense. You're talking about Israelis, not Jews as a whole.

There are 5 classified levels of automation. At the lower levels of automation, the very article you are responding to quotes this evidence for you. Here is another article that gets deeper into it, I haven't read it all so feel free to draw your own conclusions, but this data has been available and well reported on for many years. https://www.consumeraffairs.com/automotive/autonomous-vehicle-safety-statistics.html

They only have to work better and more consistently than humans to be a net positive. Which I believe most of these systems already do by a wide margin. Psychologically it's harder to accept a mistake from technology than it is from a human because the lack of control, but if the goal is to save lives, these safety systems accomplish that.

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Gas

Depends on what you mean by that. I'm not a linguist, but I've heard a lot of them speak, so I hope someone more qualified will correct me where I am wrong.

At an early age language needs to be taught in it's present localized state to give a base structure for learning. With that language learning we need to teach structure of language locally and also more generally. Later in their learning, if we taught everyone in society the reality that linguists already know, that language changes and evolves over time and place, and teach language basics like how language itself works, we see better outcomes. The worst outcomes we see in language learning is when we teach only rote memorization of sounds, spelling, and rigid grammar. We can still teach that stuff, but it needs to be taught along side general language structures, language theory, and an understanding of practical realities to see better outcomes.

Whatever we do, language will always change rapidly over time. It's better to teach in a way that prepares people for the fluidity of language, than to teach people only the rigid structures that will inevitably change.

Language is largely not prescriptive, no matter how much people want it to be. Prescriptivism is like holding your hand out to stop a river, it completely misunderstands how language flows over time.

I'm not smart enough to spot the error in your comment, so I guess you're an AI.

And a way of renormalizing misogyny.