So, you're equating Sporting engines (aka RACING) with CAFE standards compliant transportation for a mom and her two kids?

And you tell me to piss off?

LOL.

No.

You're not wrong, but you are.

The laws ARE garbage. If a test can be rigged, it will be. This is the nature of how things are. China WILL win, if we continue to regulate ourselves out of competition.

The US has a similar problem, we have CAFE standards that were SUPPOSED to require car manufacturers to increase efficiencies to IMPOSSIBLE levels. The problem is, those rules only applied to "cars". Almost all US car manufacturers have stopped making cars, and the ones they are building are largely big muscle cars, and not fuel efficient ones. Instead, they are building SUVs that aren't "cars" but are classed as "trucks" and exempt, and a few Hybrids that really nobody actually wants.

The law of unintended consequences is undefeated

"There ought to be a law"

Every bad law starts out with "good intentions" as if that was enough. Results don't matter, only the intent. Results can be horrible but if you oppose it, "You want bad things to happen" and are

They're also never actually free on the scamazon store, it's just a subscription that you don't ever own.

It's coming to light due to the private equity buyout lead by esteemed real estate criminal Jared Kushner. This is likely anti-woke washing to entice a class of customers who have already moved along due to EA sucking for lots of other reasons which won't be addressed.

Why solve real problems intentionally created due to mismanagement when you can just play the culture war card and get a bunch of knee-jerk reactions?

Stops Signs are red. Stop Lights are red. Cameras generate revenue. Unfortunately the hidden cost of red light cameras are that there are MORE problems and aren't "orderly".

I did a very shitty job in my post. And for that I'm sorry.

"Society" doesn't care about anyone in particular, only in perhaps ... maybe .. possibly .. in the most generic sense there is. But that is debatable because we'll just run the playbook of ________(Insert Sob Story Here).

Society isn't care about anyone, and anyone trying to pretend it does, or even should, is selling you something worthless. It is literally impossible for everyone to care about everyone else equally. That is why we have families, tribes, communities and the like. Lets tear those apart and see how society thrives (sarcasm)

You have been fined for running that red light by a camera operated by "not a government" tech company on behalf of said government, with only money flowing to the city and very low oversight. Because it is AI.

I was speaking along these lines. Not the Social Media sites themselves.

But it doesn't matter, because "there ought to be a law" rules people these days.

Unless you're penalizing the CONSUMER, this has zero chance of having any real effect.

"There ought to be a law" - Every Karen Ever

Notions of "noon" is a relic of a preindustrial lifestyle.

unlikely it will be good for much with less than 1GB memory available. Should be a good reminder that true personal computers are still available and at only a modest cost premium.

Make all the clocks world wide set to UTC.

Current consensus is that Neanderthals and modern humans are the same species. Genetic analysis shows a couple of percent Neanderthal DNA in modern Europeans. The image of Neanderthal as "hunched, sloping forehead, and ape-like" is thought to be incorrect, it comes from one skeleton that is believed to have been deformed, possibly having acromegaly.

About half a dozen distinct human "types" (Neanderthal is one) are known to have existed, it's thought that there were several more, possibly many more, but evidence from that far back is sparse. It's thought that they were all the same species and could interbreed successfully.

Neanderthals were shorter, stockier, and had larger cranial capacity, but sometime around 70,000 years ago, a different subtype, homo sapiens sapiens, got the upper hand cognitively. Around 40,000 years ago they were the only subtype remaining. (Note that there was an ice age at the time.)

About 10,000 years ago we switched from hunter-gatherers to farming and herding, stayed in one place for generations, and began to build civilization. About 3,000 BC we started casting metal, which was the start of the bronze age.

All of these are approximate, different sources give different dates, the dates change as new evidence comes up (usually pushing the dates further back), and you can't really pin down a specific date anyway. For example, lots of cultures went through the bronze age at different times: it started somewhere in the near East, and swept over the globe over the course of hundreds of years, agriculture was independently invented in 10 or more places, and so on.

People likely to succeed in managing a business will be low in trait agreeableness. This is well known and has been known for years.

Despite the apparent implication of "disagreeable" people being bad, it means that such people are more focused on themselves, unlikely to be swayed by the opinions of others, and more self serving. It's a trait that allows businesses to succeed, by having the owner focus on the success goals of the business instead of the success goals of other people.

Contrast with high agreeableness, where the person is more externally focused. Psychologists and nurses would typically be high agreeableness.

Everyone has an agreeableness score, and it's a bell curve. The fact that there are people who aren't "fair" is compensated by people who are exceptionally giving.