For driving pleasure would you rather drive a throaty V-8 muscle car rumbling down the road or an EV?

Having driven both, I'll take the EV. For starters, EVs accelerate faster. The fastest production car on the market right now is the Tesla Model S Plaid (1.99 seconds 0-60 with rollout subtracted). No ICE car can match it no matter how many cylinders it has. But Tesla is not alone is break-neck acceleration. The Rivian R1T is a pickup truck that does 0-60mph in 3 seconds. But OK, I don't have Model S money (just as I don't have Ferrari money). Even your more pedestrian EV's like the Model 3/Y Long Range (not the performance versions) can do a very quick 4.5 seconds. Not only that, but that super addicting push you into the seat torque is available instantly at any speed and under any condition. You don't have to be in the right gear at the right RPMs to feel it. It's always there. I have both a Model Y and a BMW M235i 6MT. One would think the BMW is the more fun car. 320 HP, manual transmission, small, light-ish. It's a blast on the back roads and no slouch in a straight line. It's on paper 0-60 is about the same as the Tesla. However, in the real world, if I'm looking for that sudden punch of power, I don't always get it from the BMW. I'll get it launching from a standstill. I might get it in a low gear if the RPMs are already high. But otherwise, I'm not getting the full g-force potential the car is capable of. Don't get me wrong, there is plenty of power for confidently passing at highways speeds, but no one is going to spill their coffee. The Model Y, on the other hand, you always get that maximum g potential. You could be going 80mph on the highway. If you mash the accelerator, everyone in the car will be thrown into their seats and have butterflies in their stomachs. I enjoy both cars immensely, but the internal combustion engine is slowly losing its charm.

You get over the lack of sound. Loud engines start to sound quaint. All that noise and still slower than a family crossover. People's associations with what "fast" or "powerful" sounds like will change. In time, the faint whine of an eclectic motor, with its sci-fi spaceship sound will be what gearheads crave. It's like the difference between propeller driven planes and jets. At one time, the roar of a WWII piston driven fighter like a P51 or Spitfire were the epitome of power and speed. Now it's an F/A-18 breaking the sound barrier in a flyby over your favorite sporting event.

I did. Read some the general critics consensus afterwards and pretty much agreed. The movie seems like a parody of every recent adventure movie where Captain Jack Sparrow attempts to steal the constitution from the Nazis before the bank can foreclose on his childhood home. That's not to say that the movie wasn't entertaining. It was fine. Younger audiences would enjoy it, but there are much better executed movies in the genre. The pacing is a little off, the CGI is just so-so, and you are asked to suspend disbelief just a little too much. If you read about the production of the movie, you wouldn't be surprised. Based on a popular video game series, went through rewrite after rewrite, passed between half the directors in Hollywood for years between finally getting made (and with Covid also throwing a wrench in the mix). Considering I watched it at home on Netflix, the ticket price was worth it, but I'm glad I hadn't paid to see it in a theater.

Everyone on here is complaining about how every movie is trying to push an agenda. This is not one of them, unless you think "don't give up" and "don't let greed cloud your judgment" are too divisive in this day and age.

I also hear people on here complaining that critics are out of touch and snobby. That may be true to many, but there are also many who understand who a movie is intended for and measure it's quality based on its intended audience. Roger Ebert ascribed to this. And in the case of this movie, those good critics have seen them all. They know what a good version of the adventure film targeted to ages 13 - 30 is. They just happen to not think Uncharted is one of them.

Elderly drivers? In NYC? If you have lived long enough to be considered elderly, you should have the intelligence and sense of self-preservation to not drive in NYC. There's probably a few out there, but they would certainly not be counted as the "pansy-ass drivers". You can be sure that if you get in the way of 80-year old Ethel Goldstein's Lincoln, you will receive a mix of horn blaring, F-bombs and middle fingers. The "pansy-ass drivers" are the tourists who were dumb enough to drive into the city and not immediately park at the Port Authority and spend the rest of their time in the city on foot, subway or taxi. You can also find them frantically asking passersby the quickest way out of there. They won't make the same mistake again.

All joking aside, Manhattan is easily the most challenging and chaotic driving experience in the United States. I've been behind the wheel in many cities across the country and nothing comes close. Yes, the drivers are aggressive. The pedestrians are plentiful and aggressive. The lines on the street are merely a suggestion. There may be two lanes painted, but there's a truck unloading in one of them and a taxi dropping off a passenger in the other. It's all about situational awareness and going with the flow of what's around you rather than following any written traffic rules. If Waymo can work there, they can work anywhere.

Health has been a focus of some GMO plants. "Golden Rice" is probably the best example. From Wikipedia:

Golden rice is a variety of rice (Oryza sativa) produced through genetic engineering to biosynthesize beta-carotene, a precursor of vitamin A, in the edible parts of rice.[1][2] It is intended to produce a fortified food to be grown and consumed in areas with a shortage of dietary vitamin A. Vitamin A deficiency causes xerophthalmia, a range of eye conditions from night blindness to more severe clinical outcomes such as keratomalacia and corneal scars, and permanent blindness. It also increases risk of mortality from measles and diarrhea in children.

I would not be surprised if there are modifications that could be made to animals that could boost certain vitamins when consumed, or reduce the harm of eating them in some way (e.g. reduce heart disease). However, I have a feeling increasing output (bigger, grow faster like AquaVantage Salmon) and decreasing environmental impact will be the primary targets.

This. So much this. Not just to build credit for when you really need it, but because it is very often financially advantageous to borrow instead of pay cash. If the interest rate is lower than the return you could reasonably expect on an investment (e.g. Index mutual fund), then you should finance the purchase and invest your cash. This is generally true for mortgages and auto loans, but will vary depending on your credit history/score. Bad credit or no history, will not get you favorable rates (if approved at all). I made this mistake buying my first car after college. I was given the (poor) advice from someone who is otherwise financially savvy that not having any debt at all would be seen as more favorable when applying for a future loan. So I sold an investment to pay cash for my car. Fast forward to when I wanted to apply for a financing option (0% interest for 12 months and I otherwise had the cash). Even for a relatively small amount, I was denied because of lack of history. My one credit card with a low limit was not enough for this lender to judge my worthiness. Plus, on top of that, had I kept the money invested during that time, I would have come out much further ahead financially. Same thing happened to a friend who had a very well paying job and saved most of his money into his 30's. He also had never financed a car and didn't even use credit cards (debit only) because he was always told "debt is bad". Knowing his financial situation and his character, he should have been approved no problem, but a bank sees no history, so he was denied for a reasonable auto loan. As long as you have the means to pay back the loan, there is nothing wrong with borrowing, in fact it is the financially wise thing to do.

BNPL, on the other hand, seems to be a different conversation. I can see how one might be able to use a BNPL to maximize the work their money is able to do (e.g. keep cash in interest bearing savings for longer), but the short term nature of these loans (and the pitiful APR on savings accounts these days) gives you very little benefit for the work you'd have to put in. I'm sure there's some guy out there who has been able to successfully do a BNPL hack, just like extreme couponers or credit card points hackers, but it's probably a lot of work. I am also concerned with how these are marketed. In the only Klarna ad I've seen, Maya Rudolph wants to buy some new boots. Yeesh. In this scenario, if you can't pay for the boots right now, or by the end of the month on your credit card, then you shouldn't buy the boots. I'm sure there are some legit use cases out there, though. Can you do this with medical expenses? Home repairs? Basically, unexpected things that come up where you HAVE to pay for, but the seller does not have very flexible terms. But I guess that wouldn't be as profitable as telling the recent college grad that yes they can buy that unnecessary new shiny object.

You haven't exactly explained why you won't subscribe to Disney+, though. Or why distributing through Hulu or Netflix would be better for everyone (or do you mean better for exisitng Hulu and Netflix subscribers?) If it's because you don't like the idea of the content owner also being the distributer, then you shouldn't be subscribing to Hulu or Netflix either. Both produce and distribute their own content. And so does Amazon and HBO/HBO Max. The most popular Netlfix shows tend to be the ones they produced themselves. What if Disney decided that the Mandalorian was going to be a Disney Channel (the cable channel) exclusive? Prior to Disney+ they did that all the time. Sure, you could choose to get Disney Channel via the local cable provider or via a satellite provider, but if you want to watch that Disney owned show, you had to pay someone for access to the Disney owned channel. In fact when I was a kid it was a "premium" channel you had to pay extra for, just like HBO.

It seems to me that you just don't want to subscribe to yet another streaming service. Which I totally understand. But unless Disney+ is not offered where you live ("I am not a Disney+ subscriber. This is a conscious choice"), I wouldn't exactly call that a supply problem. Sounds more like a demand problem. The supply is there, you just don't demand it enough to pay the asking price. As for DVD release, sure they may get some additional cash from DVD's, but that's not the business they are interested in. If you won't sign up for a Disney+ subscription, then Disney actually isn't interested in your money. In fact, catering to Voyager529's specific needs might even lose them money. The Mandalorian is clearly the flagship content for Disney+. It was created solely for the purpose of getting more people to subscribe. The "Disney back-catalogue" audience only gets you so many subscribers. The "I need a constant stream of fresh Star Wars content" audience is the real gold mine.

I'm really not surprised that kids don't see the value of CS, especially when these programs seem to be pushing kids towards a career in CS, rather than just a practical understanding. Kids never see the long term value of anything. My kid doesn't see the value of just plain math! She keeps asking whether certain professions require math (she's 8 and my usual answer is, "if you want to get paid for your work, you need to know how to count your money."). But I think the goal of these programs of creating more programmers is not really what we need. I would much prefer that everyone has some exposure to how all of the software around us functions at a basic level, and be able to identify when something could be automated. They don't need to be able to write the code themselves, because they can find a programmer to do it for them. Those without any exposure, tend to try to brute force things manually and waste a lot of time, when a quick Excel formula could have completed the task in minutes. If they are exposed, they at least know to ask. I see the same value with getting an exposure to databases and SQL. The basics can help one recognize what kind of report/data they want and express it in a very clear manner to someone who is an expert. After getting exposure myself, I tend to ask for data in sort a sort of pseudo-SQL that an expert would instantly recognize (I would like you to select all of the records from the contacts table where [some criteria] is true. Also, please group it by state and sort alphabetically by last name).

So I guess my advice is, keep exposing kids to this stuff. It is useful to them, even if they don't realize it right now. But don't expect many to become programmers. You certainly will pick up a few more programmers than if you didn't do anything, but the real value is that we have a more well rounded and software literate population.

This.
Very confusing communication from WHO. This article from Forbes actually tries to parse out the distinction, but even still it's hard to tell exactly which the WHO was referring to. Language matters.
https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.forbes.com%2Fsites%2Fm...

I agree with this and would also add that the dynamic of Parent-Child is not the same as Teacher-Student. Many parents already notice the difference between how their kids behave at school or in other settings where a different adult is in charge vs. how they behave at home. Kids are less afraid to disobey, talk back or just plain not listen to their parents, but will often behave quite the opposite with a teacher. Part of it is a comfort level with the authority figure (kids are willing to piss off their parents because they trust and feel safe with their parents). As someone with a 2nd grader who has completed one week of home/remote schooling, I see it clearly. Just had parent teacher conferences a few weeks ago. My second grader is reported as being a model student. Always follows directions, takes the work seriously and puts in a good effort, goes with the flow of the teacher's plan. Day one at home, she woke up a bit excited and motivated at this new way of working, but things quickly devolved as the idea of Mom or Dad telling her to complete the worksheet is met with opposition and a desire to do something of her own choosing. She wants to finish something as quickly as possible quality be damned. My theory is that she does not associate the assignment as coming from her teacher (with grading/feedback that comes with) and instead just sees it as a chore coming from her parents.

Obviously every kid is different. People have been successfully homeschooling long before this, but it's not for everyone. My daughter seems to thrive in a classroom environment, while others may find they are better suited to an at home, 1:1 environment. As for the future, I don't think it will be as extreme as some want to claim, but I would certainly expect a rise in classic homeschooling as some find it's a better fit for them. Schools may incorporate more digital and remote learning into their traditional classrooms (e.g. Say goodbye to snow days) more quickly than they would have previously.

But an Uber/Lyft trip would still emit more carbon than a personal car trip assuming the cars have similar MPGs. When you drive yourself, for example from your house to the store, you only emit CO2 between your house and the store. If you hired a ride, you are emitting CO2 beginning with when you order the ride, the distance it takes for the driver to reach your house and the distance to the store. It could be more if that is the driver calls it quits for the day and drives themselves home afterwards.

Variables in this equation include how far the driver has travel to get to you, differences in MPG between the car you'd own and the car that picks you up, and whether or not there is easy parking at the destination (e.g. need to drive extra distance to park as opposed to being dropped off at the entrance).

As a very pale white person who takes his sunscreens seriously, I have mixed feelings on this. My environmental side says that if there is scientific proof that it is harmful (which it appears there is), then we should stop using it. However, I've used a lot of different sunscreens over the years in different forms (lotions, sprays, whatever "sport" is...maybe gel?) and have my preferences. Unfortunately, the sunscreens that I find the most reliably effective and easy to apply happen to have all the harmful stuff. And to me, ease of application is a big factor in whether it's effective. If it's easy, I won't think twice about stopping to reapply and i can actually get my kid to sit still long enough to apply/reapply. The reason oxybenzone is so popular is that, when used, the sunscreen usually less viscous and easier to spread. That not only means quicker application, but more likely to be complete coverage. All of the zinc based ones that environmentalists praise I find very thick and therefore difficult to apply, makes your skin very greasy to the touch and also come off more easily. In fact the labels usually recommend reapplying much more often that their chemical filled counterparts. It doesn't help either that when Consumer Reports started including a lot of the organic brands in their testing, they found with most, the true tested SPF was dangerously variable and overall poorly rated for their intended purpose of preventing sun damage. This has corroborated my experience of more sun burns when I've tried them.

However, I'm hopeful that the big brands (Coppertone, Neutragena, et. al.) will start offering products that meet these environmental restrictions with the same effectiveness as their current stuff.

Mix for me too, but can be complicated to define sometimes.

My CDs have all been ripped to MP3 and stored on my media center. If listening at home on my stereo receiver, I'm playing these files. I rarely ever take out and play a CD anymore (although my 6 y/o daughter has some CDs that she plays on her karaoke machine in her room)

MP3s are also loaded into Google Play music for easy access on my smartphone from anywhere. Unless the file has been downloaded to my device, I am technically streaming these over WiFi.

Pandora is used by everyone in the family, especially when playing outside the living room on a Google home (Google home refuses to play my own music library loaded in Google Play music for some reason, only their own "radio stations"). But Pandora also gets play on the main stereo.

For anything outside of our own music collection, especially if we want a specific song to play, we use YouTube. This is especially fun when entertaining in the living room as we can queue up music videos from our phones onto the Roku. Everyone's a DJ.

Still prefer FM radio most of the time in my car. I do like some of the radio personalities as well as the music discovery.

This seems like a pretty niche feature set, so if anyone does make it, expect to pay a lot more for it. But I really don't understand some of these requests, and sound pretty stubborn. Here's my take on each:

1. Removable battery

Seems nice in theory, but all it does is take up more space that could otherwise be used by a bigger, longer lasting battery. It also creates restrictions in where components can be placed, because the battery must always be accessible to the user. But there are workarounds for non-removable batteries. If battery life is a concern, you have battery extending cases (where there is an extra battery built into the case) or portable chargers you can throw in your bag. If you are worried about replacing a battery that no longer holds a charge, you could still replace the battery, just a little more involved. Really only something you should need to do every 2 years or so.

2. Physical keyboard (e.g. BB KEY2)

Every once in a while someone comes out with one, and the market overwhelmingly rejects it. All of my friends/colleagues who are former Blackberry die hards have moved on and never looked back. Typing on a tiny physical keyboard has never been pleasant. Learn how to use Swype. It is much more efficient. Compared to a physical keyboard, it is faster, easier to do with one hand, and also pretty easy to do without looking (still should proof-read, though, but that's the case no matter what type or size keyboard).

3. Not ridiculously thin

Define "ridiculously". It needs to fit in your pocket right? That's where most people keep their phones. Thinner means you can fit more in your pocket. If you say, "well I'm just going to slap a giant case on it anyway like an otterbox", well, then I guess thin is even more important so that a phone+case doesn't take up too much room. Is thin ever a detriment, though? It may not be important to you, or a major selling point, but do you actually have a minimum thickness that you simply could not ever go under?

4. Not ridiculously large

I'm with you on this one. I have smaller hands and I like to one-hand my phone. I used to travel a ton for work, so I needed something I could use while walking through an airport dragging a carry-on behind me. 5 inches is my max. I really liked my 4.7" original Moto X, though. That was perfect. Luckily, manufacturers seem to have gotten the message. Pixels, Galaxies and iPhones all come in 2 sizes now and the smaller one isn't just a cheaper, slower, inferior in every way version of the bigger one. Hopefully this trend continues and other manufacturers with more differentiated feature sets follow.

5. No infinity edge

I'm curious about your issue with an infinity edge. You don't want a phone that's ridiculously large, so an infinity edge only helps with this. You can pack more screen real estate into a smaller overall phone. If you mean like the screens Samsung has on the S9 and introduced in the "Edge" series, I get it, but Samsung is the only one doing this, so not hard to avoid them.

6. No notches

Legitimate complaint. I'm not a huge fan either, but I'm warming up to it. I guess it depends on how you look at it. Does it take away usable screen space, or does it open up more screen space that would otherwise be a large bezel? Again this goes back to size. You don't want ridiculously large, but this is a way to pack more into a smaller size. There is a lot of experimenting going on here (that's essentially what this article is about - Samsung is trying out a bunch of stuff to see what sticks) and I like the way OnePlus has kept it minimal. At the same time, though, I thought the very slim bezels on the Pixel 2XL, Pixel 3 (small size) and Samsung S9 are really nice and didn't see a need to gain an extra few millimeters.

7. No headphone "courage"

I'm with you here... for now. And I say this as someone who has a "courageous" Pixel 2. It's honestly my only gripe with the phone. I like the ability to just plug into any AV system and play my music, but now I can't unless I have my adapter with me. I think this will not be as much of an issue once the world around us adapts. USB-C everywhere would be a good start. I see this akin to when Apple killed Flash. A pain for many in the beginning, since so much was flash based, but once the incentive was there to move to HTML5, we are now in a much happier Flash-free world. That's my hope for the headphone jack at least. Maybe I'm too optimistic.

8. No AMOLED (IPS please)

Really curious about your issue with AMOLED. It is a much better quality display just visually speaking than LCD/LED and is much better for battery life. Also, if your phone has a notch, you can just turn it off with an AMOLED. Black on an AMOLED is literally turning off the pixels and they don't use any energy. This makes the ambient displays very nice as well, since you can have the time and notification icons lit up constantly with very little battery consumption. If part of your need for a removable battery was to extend battery life, well this is one step towards not needing the extra battery. AMOLED should be a requirement instead of a deal-breaker.

9. No (front) cameras

What's your issue with a front camera? Don't need it? Don't use it. It's not hurting you. You may not like taking selfies all the time, but if you want to do any video chat, it's a requirement. Front camera is a requirement for 99% of phone buyers, so eliminating it would make a phone way too niche to be marketable.

10. No biometric unlock

What is your issue with biometric? Yes, it is less secure than a strong password. If that is the issue, don't enable it. I scoffed at Apple when they introduced it, just like the rest of Slashdot, but I've realized how much more convenient it is now, and consider it essential. Especially if you use your phone as part of a BYOD workplace. Strong (read long) passwords are required, which is a real pain to type in every time. I used to set something really easy to type, but would be super in-secure (eg. "qwerty7"). Bad practice, yes, but I also hated fumbling with my phone so much just to unlock it. Fingerprint solves this and is at least better than a very weak password or PIN.

11. No locked bootloaders

Reasonable request. This list is a year old, but you clearly have many options: https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fandroid.gadgethacks.co...

12. SD Card

I was with you in the past, but honestly I prefer without now. Cloud storage and back-up make overall phone storage less of an issue and make it a lot easier to get files on and off the phone to begin with. I use Dropbox, so every picture I take automatically uploads to Dropbox and then downloads locally to my desktop computer the next time it syncs. Anything I want to get onto my phone, I can just download from Dropbox. Having an SD card usually meant sacrificing on-board storage, which meant less room for apps and data. I hated having to manage my storage and moving stuff on and off the SD card. Just get more on-board storage and be done with it. I do agree that the storage upgrades are way overpriced, though. If that is your gripe, it is a legitimate one. If you don't trust cloud providers, try OwnCloud. I've heard good things.

13. Configurable RGB indicator light for notification

AMOLED made the indicator light obsolete. I personally always hated them. I liked it initially, but then it just became this annoying nag. I'd have to turn my phone face down at night or the light would keep me up. Long after I ditched that light, I would occasionally have to turn over my wife's phone because the blinking was keeping me up. My AMOLED ambient display is now my alarm clock and clock display at night. It won't wake me up, but If I do wake up and glance at it, I can see the time and if I have any notifications. Less obtrusive than even the old red digital alarm clock. To each their own I guess. However, if you really wanted that light, and you have an AMOLED display, you could create an app that mimicked it. Going back to the AMOLED benefits, the only section of your screen using power would be that tiny dot.

14. IR transmitter

I'm sure you have your use cases, but I feel we are moving away from IR transmission in general. I can control my A/V receiver, Roku, Kodi running on my PC (connected to TV), and now my new TV all from apps on my phone. None of these use IR. Everything is now either Bluetooth or WiFi based and we are much better for it. No need for line of sight. This gives you more options in arranging your living room and how you place your peripherals and allows you to control things from a different room (e.g. change the song playing on the stereo).

15. Real GPS

Define "real" GPS. Every phone has real GPS, but they often don't require a full constellation of satellites to work. There's some estimating going on when there is only one (or none) available. For most, that's OK and even preferable. I'd much rather have a "you are somewhere in this area" vs. "no signal". I have a Garmin watch I use for running. It is much more accurate than my phone for tracking distance, pace, etc. and much lighter than strapping my phone to my arm. But I often have to wait to get enough satellites, and I have had instances where it couldn't find any. I wouldn't be surprised, though that you could have "real" GPS on your phone simply through software. The hardware is already all there, it's simply a matter of telling the app you are using to wait for a full constellation and to not use cell tower triangulation. I'm just speculating here, though, so if there are any experts reading, I'd love to learn more.

16. SDR AM/FM ... LF-UHF preferred

I guess you have your use cases. This is VERY niche, though. Expect to pay a premium for it.

Not trying to dismiss your requirements here. I'm actually genuinely curious about some of them. But I would also encourage you to be open minded about some. I think you may actually like the opposite better in some cases.

This comes full circle when someone creates restaurant seating areas with drink service but no kitchens and facilitates easy ordering from any nearby delivery kitchens.

This is actually already happening with New Jersey micro-breweries. The new tiny breweries popping up with on-site tasting rooms aren't allowed to sell food, so they make it really easy for you to bring food from elsewhere. Everything from menus and maps of delivery/takeout friendly places nearby to food trucks in the parking lot and everything in-between.

For a little background, NJ laws previously made opening a brewery in NJ very difficult, but recent changes have spurred a lot of new microbreweries popping up. However, the laws in NJ are still a bit strange. In most other states, micro-breweries will run brew pubs to give their beers more exposure and also use food sales to help pad profits, but in NJ, they are not allowed to sell food and can only have a "tasting room", not a bar. What's the difference between a tasting room and a bar? For a tasting room patrons come for the free brewery tour and then are free to purchase beer at the bar. And the tours are usually a joke. One place literally says, "Look in there. That's where we make beer. Please proceed to the tasting room." (For the beer nerds like myself, you can still have a very in depth tour of their operation if you like). But the atmosphere is usually pretty great. Most have a very communal feel that try to include the biergarten concept. Feels like hanging out at a backyard BBQ than going to your typical bar. Some are dog friendly and kid friendly, too.

Yes. On my Pixel 2, there are 3 toggles for Emergency Alerts: AMBER alerts, Extreme threats, and Severe threats.