Superficially, typing <Ctrl>+<left> seems to be the same as typing <Esc> <b>, but these are two completely different paradigms of using the editor.

Vim does not use shortcuts or hotkeys to edit the text, it uses a language to communicate with the editor.

For me, shortcuts and hotkeys are rote memorization, and I’m bad at rote memorization – compare your point “5. Ctrl-{ or } does this I think”. Do I need Ctrl-left, Super-left, Alt-left, Shift-left or Ctrl-Shift-left to jump back a word?

The vim editing language is mostly consistent and logical. I did not need to memorize it, I could learn and understand it. But that’s just me.

Far too much examples:

Most commands are abbreviations – a for append, b for back, c for change, d for delete, e for end of word, f for forward, g for goto (and more), hjkl are special, i for insert, m for mark, n for next, o for open line, p for paste, q for reqord macro is a strange spelling, r for replace, s for substitute, t for to, u for undo, v for visual mode, w for word, x for extinguish, y for yank, z is just a prefix for arcane stuff. Capital letters are usually variants of their minuscle counterpart – like A for append at end of line.

Commands take a repeat count, and a lot of commands take objects/movements, and these reuse the commands, like “delete inside backticks” => di`, “yank inside brackets” => yi{, “change up to third slash” => c3t/

If you are fluent in vim, you won’t type shortcuts while editing, you will talk to your editor.

As for more compelling examples:

“I’d like to change the next 2 sentences” translates to )c2)

“Please format this paragraph.” translates to gqap

“Swap these two characters.” translates to xp

And I did not touch ex mode, vimscript and plugins yet.

https://vim-adventures.com/

They are on the rise.

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

No, it’s about self harm and suicide as well. Being suicidal is a symptom of depression, not a free choice. In most (all?) countries psychiatric wards are oblieged to protect you from suicide.

Depends on where you are in the world.

It’s not a question of age, but of the car model. Any german upper middle class car from (at least) the 80s onwards was able to comfortably go 180–200 km/h, upper class > 200 km/h, lower middle class 160–200, smaller cars provide an adventurous driving experience at 150 km/h.

There shouldn’t be bumps on the autobahn.

Even better!

Which way shall we choose

• substitute pedestrians by autonomous bipedal robots?
• develop autonomous exoskeletons which have to be used by pedestrians?
• Or aim high and develope injectable nano-sized neuro implants that take care of the autonomization of pedestrians?
• other options?

🤔difficult choice.

Well, I do use a car that is able to drive (almost) autonomous on a highway, so I know that the tech to drive on highways exist since several years.

All the difficult stuff – slow traffic, parking cars, crossings, pedestrians… – does not exist on highways.

The only problem that still remains is the problem you mention: what to do in case of trouble?

Of course you have to stop on a highway to prevent an accident or in case of an emergency. That’s exactly what humans do. But then humans get out of the car, set up warning signs, get help &c. Cars cannot do this. The result is reported in this article.

I’m not sure your idea of 70s and 80s IT infrastructure is historically accurate.

50 years ago it was technically impossible to rent time on a mainframe/server owned by a third party without having physical access to the hardware.

You, or to be more accurate, your company would buy a mainframe and hire a mathematician turned programmer to write the software you need.

Even if – later in the course of IT development – you/your company did not develop your own software but bought proprietary software this software was technically not able to “call back home” until internet connection became standard.

So no, computers did not start with “the corporate elite” controlling them.

Computerized cars, on the other hand, are controlled by their manufycturers since they were introduced. There is no open source alternative.

Open standards for computerized cars would be great — but I’m very pessimistic they will evolve unless publically funded and/or enforced.

Just ban pedestrians. Problem solved,

The discussed incident does not involve driving assist systems, driverless autonomous taxis are already on the streets:

A number of Cruise driverless vehicles were stopped in the middle of the streets of the Sunset District after Outside Lands in Golden Gate Park on Aug. 11, 2023.

Autonomous driving isn’t necessarily controlled by a corporation any more than your PC is.

That’s just outright wrong.

Modern cars communicate with their manufacturer, and we don’t have any means to control this communication.

I can disconnect my PC from the internet, I cannot disconnect my car. I can install whatever OS and apps pleases me on my PC, I cannot do anything about the software on my car’s computer.

So, while I can take full control of my PC if it pleases me, I cannot take any control of my car.

Why? Driving on highways is the easiest kind of driving?