The vehicles with a higher automated driving rating than Tesla use a more diverse range of sensory inputs. While it may not make fully autonomous driving, it very clearly would have made Tesla closer to it based on the fact that cars that use things like lidar in addition to cameras surpassed Tesla’s rating many years ago.
Finally someone else familiar with the most deadly animal in North America.
That’s enough chit-chat, nerds. Back to work.
🤣
And the locked “knife display”? Here are my knives, I really like knives, I like to display that I really like knives, would you like to talk about knives? Can I talk at you for 30 minutes about sharpening techniques? Perhaps you’d like to visit my katana collection in the other room? Lol. All kept near his fedora collection no doubt.
All in the name of friendly ribbing though, hobbies are cool and often niche. I’m often a little bemused by people’s esoteric or nerdy hobbies.
But I’m scared to ask if this dude even has kids, or if he’s just storing his kitchen knives in a locked box out of sheer paranoia. There’s safe and then there’s… whatever this is.
A black venti coffee from Starbucks has almost 450mg of caffeine. 200mg probably isn’t “whopping (!)”-worthy.
I have a co-worker that drinks a pot of coffee at work each day by himself. That’s about 1,200mg of caffeine, and he has a cup in the morning before he gets to work, so he’s probably having about 1,500mg/day. Admittedly that’s on the high side.
800mg of caffeine from black coffee per day is actually shown to be good for you. Reduced risk of alzheimer’s, type 2 diabetes, certain cancers, and Parkinson’s. Reduces inflammation. Lowered rates of liver cirrhosis and liver cancer.
Show a rabid Trump republican a picture of voters at a polling place and inform them it’s in a democratic stronghold and record what they say. I’ll wait.
It varies by state, but the simple answer is yes, the same would be true. Neither hypothetical tshirt is likely to lead to allegations of electioneering today given the slogans are no longer central in political discourse.
Which is prohibited in polling locations in Georgia. That is why they were asked to leave. You can wear costumes to vote as long as they don’t constitute electioneering. The definition of electioneering can be fairly broad however. Wearing a black lives matter tshirt, for instance, has been considered electioneering.
The argument goes like this: Georgia, along with 11 other states, has prohibited filming and photos in polling locations, which is a legal prohibition in the public interest that has been upheld by the courts.
It’s not quite generally prohibited, but Georgia is one of 12 states where it is prohibited.
It’s more or less an inevitability at this point, regardless of what we do. Really we’re just trying to get corporations and countries to make changes so it will be Gen A’s (or the following generation’s) problem instead of Z.
Normalcy now has an unavoidable term limit. The question is if we’re going to shorten how long that timespan is by desperately holding onto normalcy now for as long as we can, or if we’re going to start making things harder, more challenging, and less normal sooner to make the transition less painful and give it a longer on-ramp.
Currently we seem to be choosing option A.
For what it’s worth, I’ve seen some friends take things a little more seriously when I’ve explained that currently we’re going to see abrupt and incredibly disruptive changes at the point in our (Gen Z and Millenials) lives when we’re at the age when we’ll be least able to tolerate the changes and most reliant on others. In 40-50 years, Z and M are going to be senior citizens at best. While we may be full of distracted, dopamine-seeking denial now, by the time shit really starts hitting the fan, we’re going to be extra weight on the generations struggling desperately to survive.
Don’t expect a happy retirement.
The majority of individuals on platforms like Lemmy—and social media more broadly—engage almost exclusively as passive consumers. Their involvement often begins and ends with the simple act of upvoting or downvoting content. This limited interaction speaks volumes about the nature of digital engagement, where consuming information or entertainment takes precedence over meaningful interaction or contribution. The absence of deeper engagement is not a failing of the platform itself but a reflection of broader societal tendencies.
People, in general, tend toward passivity, a trait that extends beyond online spaces and into areas like civic participation. In the United States, for example, voter turnout remains notoriously low. People express their dissatisfaction with the status quo, they crave change, and they criticize institutions, yet they shy away from taking the minimal steps required to enact that change, often hiding behind a hand-waving comment involving the words “systemic,” “structure,” and/or “institutions,” a transparent way of excusing their unwillingness to actually act. As though they themselves are not parts of those systems, structures, and institutions. The same individuals who will upvote or downvote content online without a second thought are often the ones who abstain from voting in elections, an “upvote/downvote” that directly impact their lives.
What is even more concerning is that this passivity is not merely a result of laziness or apathy, but something ingrained and encouraged by modern society. Our institutions—whether educational, political, or corporate—tend to value compliance over initiative. Decision-making, once seen as a marker of personal agency and responsibility, is increasingly viewed as a burden. People have been conditioned to prefer being told what to do rather than take responsibility for their choices.
If a decision goes wrong, there’s an inherent comfort in being able to place blame on someone else. This social conditioning makes being passive, fading into the wallpaper, not only acceptable but desirable for many. And yet, these same people will often feel deeply dissatisfied with their lives. But, rather than do something about it, they continue to be helpless, wishing someone would decide for them to improve their lives and then forcing them to do it.
While it’s easy to express frustration with the passive nature of online participants, it is also, sadly, understandable. They are products of a society that rewards inaction more than action, where engagement is often reduced to the simplest and least effortful gestures. These platforms reflect the broader societal trend toward disengagement from real, consequential decision-making, reinforcing and reflecting a vicious cycle of passive impotence while they wait for someone or something to fix things for them.
I can imagine, but it only adds bitterness. Seems counterproductive for this application.
Yeah fair enough, I was just highlighting the irony.
Why in the world would you include the lemon pith? Or is that not what you mean by “lemon flesh”?
The best part of this is you would need to give them your personal information to pay them, and you’d need to accept the necessary cookies for them to know you’ve paid when you access the website. 🤣🤣🤣
It’s not like a lecture. It’s a pep rally. Energy rally. To rally is to come together for a common cause. It’s meant to bring people together to boost and sustain energy, in this case about a candidate or party. You’re not going there to learn things.