admiralteal

You mean Half Life: Full Dive, followed by Half Life: Full Dive 2. The second in a trilogy never to be finished.

Still, the issue isn’t the presence of a throttle. It’s the specs of the machine.

The idea that the law should be framed around whether or not the vehicle needs to be peddled is backwards. The relevant machine specs are what the legislation should address. Which is still, primarily, top speed. All incident evidence we have suggests that below ~20mph / 30 kph, even full automobiles see precipitous dropoffs in serious injuries, so that’s the place to start. We see most places really serious about bike networks going reasonably further past that (25 or 20 kph). That’s all reasonable. If you further want to have requirements on acceleration or weight, it’s worth investigating that.

Having the legislation require peddling is just a way to create weird loopholes in the law. It’s pearl-clutching and moral panic. And worse, it creates accessibility issues and can pressure people off the bikeped infrastructure who would’ve used it reasonably and safely back into cars.

The law should narrowly address the actual problem, not some tertiary smell the problem has created. The idea that a bike that has pedals is magically safer than an identical bike with an identical frame, motor, and everything which has a throttle is preposterous.

I am totally convinced an ebike with a throttle is safer and easier to use for its rider than one without one at any speed. I don’t think they should be required – because that’s just silly – but I think anyone the claiming opposite, that only peddled, throttle-less vehicles are safe, has fallen off the deep end.

It doesn’t add any cost to include a throttle on the ebike.

Regulate speeds, not mechanisms. Moving people to micromobility is a benefit regardless of the form of that micromobility. Speed is the safety concern, not any of this loophole-inducing nonsense.

I, for one, could not be made to care one iota about what Jack Dorsey has to say. He’s a weird little fuck, and only getting weirder.

Time long past to be a lot more honest about these tech billionaires – pretty much every one of was just immensely, immensely lucky, and until they can talk honestly about how nearly everything to do with their success compared to any other mid-level software developer was just blind luck, we should assume everything coming out of their mouths is pure grandiose delusion.

Google loves to have entirely ai-driven moderation which makes decisions that are impossible to appeal. They are certain that one AI team lead is more valuable than 20 customer service agents. Meanwhile, YouTube shorts is still a pipeline to Nazidom and death by electrical fire.

Might be the worst customer service in the tech industry, though that’s a highly competitive title.

They also don’t offer replacement parts (even major parts like the charging case) for their headphones. So I guess they’re intended to be a disposable product. Evil shit.

If you’ve ever had an entirely positive interaction with Google customer service… you’d probably be the first.

The user above is just one of those guys who looks at anything the dems do and thinks, look at this bitch eating crackers.

Nothing good can ever be celebrated or praised. It has to always be bad.

This is the exception to prove the rule that the other interests are definitely illegitimate. This is the website telling you that they give away your data for illegitimate purposes.

It’s not a surprise. We knew this was true. But seeing it’s spelled out like this is a little galling.

Illegitimate: not authorized by the law; not in accordance with accepted standards or rules

The website is basically admitting that they’re using your data maliciously, intentionally, by having this distinction.

I think a lot of people might be sympathetic to the idea that in wartime, you need to be stricter because of the incredibly high stakes. That Ukraine is at war, so they need to find and deal with these sources of disinformation.

I think those same people need to realize that the policies never get rolled back to a more liberal state when the war is over.

It sucks that this is a systemic advantage for authoritarians. It really sucks. It feels bad. But it’s the handicap you have to accept to resist authoritarianism.

Absent an idiotic carrier/mfg skin that disables the feature, you just long-press power then click “lockdown”.

Or reboot the device. Rebooting the device will also leave it encrypted if your device has encryption (the PIN/password is needed to decrypt, essentially).

deleted by creator

Preventing the collection of data by the state may be impossible, but they should be accountable for who has it, who it’s given to, and they should need to go through proper due process to use it against you in any kind of official proceeding.

It might be impossible to get everyone out of the databases, but we can at least force warrant requirements and the like.

Good answers here, but ignoring probably the most realistic and practical truth of the matter in my opinion.

You won’t immediately be sent to the stocks for saying “I don’t want to answer”, the worst case scenario is that some officer of the court informs you that you must answer the question even if you don’t want to. And even that is only going to happen if the attorney asking the question insists. And I struggle to imagine a situation where a competent attorney would do so.

Being hostile towards your prospective jurors, making them feel exposed and uncomfortable, is not a way to march to victory in a trial. They want to ensure you aren’t prejudiced against their client/case. Making you dislike them personally IS prejudice. Causing prejudice is a bad way to eliminate prejudice.

They will ask questions, mostly yes/no ones, that you need to answer honestly. They may ask for clarification. If you don’t want to answer and say so, it’s unlikely anyone will press you because that unnwillingness to answer is just as clear an indication of who you are as anything else.

deleted by creator

Also, how can we be assured the privacy practices of their subscription/payment platform are at least better than the (likely blockable) trackers?

Forming a financial relationship with a website is, theoretically, infinitely more traceable to your personal identity than all the cookies in the world.

Or any of the nearly-unavoidable-because-it’s-a-monopoly evil big corpos like Amazon. Chase handles their credit card and definitely significant other financial parts for them.

Also known as a SASSS

If you put a TV in a Faraday cage that blocked the relevant radio spectrum, would there be no static on it? I expected the answer to be a quick Google, but it wasn’t.

They are very useful for outlining and similar “where do I start” writing projects. They help break the dam and just get some damn words on the screen, at which point it’s often easy to continue and flesh things out to a complete thought.

Apple innovates in new and exciting ways to not support devices. They invent new antirepair technologies and have pioneered locked-in walled-garden app stores that prohibit users from doing what they want or need to keep their devices working.

They don’t get to wear the white hat just because they do some shit well. They are the bad guy. And they could change posture pretty much immediately if they were at ALL serious about their devices having long-term support. They control basically their whole tech stack and could make it so their devices can continue to be maintained indefinitely even if they aren’t doing it. But control matters more to them than support.

I really don’t think anyone should be giving them credit here, not even as a backhanded compliment.

deleted by creator