I know it's fun to rag on China, but your statement doesn't even make sense. If someone is valuable enough to warrant a travel ban, they aren't going to murder them for expressing dissent.

The best system is social democracy. Government in charge, not corporations, and government working for the electorate thanks to an electoral system that provides proper representation.

It works because it's not authoritarian, but instead gives individuals a real stake on society and in government. There is a strong social contract that is upheld, where as in other democracies like the UK and US the social contract is more of a scam than a deal.

Soon Americans won't have to work!

so forgive them for making any mistake at least one human makes?

I'm going by what economics professors told me. have you taken economics? the size of companies are supposed to be balanced. when a company is too big in that scenario, it fails. when that company fails, new more innovatove companies grow on its place and that's the theory of how the economy grows strong. but slowly the ones who make the laws swing them in their favor and they get bought out to live until they end up owning everything. so it is no different then socialism really. just substitute a few private players for government ownership.

companies aren't supposed to get that big in capitalism. they are supposed to either compete to survive or fail. once consolidated, what's the difference between capitalism and socialism? it makes no difference to me who owns it. at least the government (should be) committed to doing what is best. in your capitalism the people who own all things care nothing for me. but the answer is of course because there can be no capitalism without competition from other companies and labour markets. it is the risk of failing that is supposed to drive companies to do beneficial things as opposed to being parasites.

but the whole question is why, if you have thought of this scenario, then why a trillion dollar company couldn't test it and test it until it works.

No i think the main argument is that there is really no competition for that capital any more. Capitalism requires fair competitive markets but all the competing companies have been allowed to amalgamate into a few or a couple.

A car with front mounted cameras will only look in front of itself as well as a human. what is the first thing they tell you in defensive driving class? look down the road as far as possible. look behind you. know what is going around you at all times. these cars aren't even able to do the golden rule of driving. they can't even pull over safely. where i live you pull over for every single emergency vehicle on any side of the road. there are bridges that are 50 feet long or so that are one lane that you have to navigate by waving to the people across the bridge. when will self diving cars do these things?

that's simply not true. grok has specifically been fed right wing extremest propaganda to align better with its owners beliefs.

things are much worse in the us i think

they avoid high accident areas. that alone skews the data.

i have always lived places where it snows for half the year. nothing here yet.

they are also avoiding high accident areas

the only questions that matter are: if they were only getting rid of "waste" then why did anything change at all for these people? do they think of these people as the waste? or was it not waste at all but just something that they didn't want to fund any more? when they did the study and discovered how many people would die from their actions, did they do anything to stop it? ignorance is not an excuse for the leader of any nation.