matz1

As far as I know he never does. Maybe he said it will be eventually but never promised it can do it right now.

Your toyota at best can be said partially self drive, albeit suck at it.

The full part is where it also include: following line, navigate, parking, line change, stop and go, recognize traffic sign, etc

Where has tesla claim/promise that it can drive itself perfectly without accident ?

FSD means the car has the ability to drive itself. It doesn't necessarily mean it can drive perfectly without accident. Thats why you still need to pay attention.

It would take too long, on the contrary you want to release it as early as possible. It need to learn from real life situation. To get a true real life data you have to... release it to real life situation.

>The only bar to clear, and I mean the only bar is, "Do autonomous vehicles kill fewer human beings than humans on the road do?"

Not even that, I would totally accept if autonomous vehicles kill only slightly more than human on the road do.

Human also laughably bad and potentially dangerous in driving.

Full self driving doesn't mean perfect driving, it will always be continuous improvement.

There is no correct answer. There is only answer that you want and what you can do is to fight for your answer to become the outcome.

That being said I prefer twitter to be as hands off as possible when dealing with this.

I only need cash for maybe once a month. Transaction logs sent by mail are way too slow.

Yea that way much slower and much less convenient compared to online banking.

how do you check your balance or transaction ? you only do that over the phone ?

Accept it, remove all restriction and move on.

In a way Yes, my actual work hour is way less than half of fulltime but yet get paid fulltime salary.

Many government all of the word chose lockdown, thats prime example of not weighing cost benefit analysis.

Society does accept some level of car accident otherwise there would be no car on the road at all.

Safety regulations is good but too much safety regulation is bad.

As individual I accept some level risk, I accept that there is some level of risk that I will be in accident, the trade off of 0 risk are too much.

>So if the vast majority of people survive, we should just let it rip?

No, we should still attempt to fight it but doing so without lockdown/masks.

lockdown/masks cause misery which is should not be ignored.

> Without any counter measures such as masks or lockdowns the rate of infection would be significantly higher resulting - Tens of millions more dead

South Dakota never lockdown nor have mask mandate

Sweeden as well.

Florida mostly not lockdown

They are doing fine.

There are no significant difference between place that doing lockdown/mask compared to place that don't.

The way covid death is counted right now is highly misleading because it including everything remotely related to covid, for example death due to heart attack while being positive for covid is counted as covid death.

Death is not the sole metric, yes reducing death is a good thing but if it attempted by increasing misery due to lockdown then I don't want it.

The risk are so low, vast majority of people will survive covid just fine regardless of vaccine or any other precautions.

It is pandemic but the risk has been overly exaggerated.

Florida can host superbowl recently with almost full attendance.

yes, whereas I lean (strongly) to the earlier

Because otherwise it will create power imbalance that will put me at disadvantages, other know about me but I don't know about other.

>why don't you publish all your purchase info online? Along with where you bought them, what time, how etc? While you are at it, also publish your travel info - including mode of travel, time of travel, source, destination...

Yes I prefer that for everyone (not just me), including people in government, so that I don't have to worry about hiding the information. Hiding the information has its associated cost.

Transparency for everyone to level the playing field.

Sure its your business to be private but as times goes and as technology advances it going to be more difficult and expensive.

Then how do IRS know that the duduction is correct?

>not being able to refuse is not consent. If you're unfamiliar with this concept from other areas of human life, you can read up interpretations of GDPR consent regarding cookie banners.

Disagree, and I don't agree with GDPR.

>In France there's at least a semblance of equal chances: if you get a certain number of mayors to support your candidacy, your campaign is paid for by the State and all candidates have free campaign clips produced by national television (following their directives) and broadcast on most channels ; also this will cover printing fees for your ballots. Also, donations to political campaigns are only allowed from individuals (not companies) and have a limit (a few thousand euros). Also, there's strict regulations (though never respected) on airtime equality between candidates/parties for the whole duration of the campaign.

I don't called this rigged, this is just how to game to be played.

>Trams, buses, trains, shared bikes, shared cars

None of these take me where I want, when I want and from I want.

Bus: I have to go to the bus stop, at the specific time and it arrive at another bus stop.

>They may be slightly less convenient in some situations compared to an individual car.

slightly less convenient for you but its highly inconvenient for many other people, including me.

>How so?

The government people are elected by the people.

>When you have a "choice" between a limited set of candidates

Choice is still a choice. If there is a limited set of candidate then they can themselves try to be the candidate (not implying that it is easy)

>serious restrictions on voting rights (eg. following a conviction)

Reasonable restriction

>when candidates aren't bound to any form of contract (they can promise anything, do the opposite)?

Democracy doesn't care about that. Its up to the people. Its still democracy even if people choose lying politician.

>Also, voter turnout for last USA presidential election was only 62%

People are free to make decision to vote or not vote, democracy doesn't mean people are forced to vote.

>Only because we let governments/politicians dismantle public services to the point they're essentially useless. It is not the case everywhere, and was not always the case through history.

Where is the case of public transportation that can take you where you want, when you want and from you want ?

>the car corporations convinced the US govt

but US govt is the representative of what significant amount of US people want.

Public transportation sucks because it doesn't take you to where you want, when you want, from where you want.

That is called blind trust.

In some case it can be appropriate

https://time.com/3387226/spanking-can-be-an-appropriate-form...

That depends on how you hit your kids. It could be abuse but not always.

It is not abuse, if it used for the kids own good. Yes it is not always effective but in some case it is.

The use of monitoring doesn't mean they don't trust you.

Its a way to verify your trust, otherwise it just blind trust.

electronic monitoring is just a tools, it can be use for good or bad, it would be sucks if that made illegal, I would certainly oppose it.

What you want to prevent or make illegal is the usage of electronic monitoring that is harmful, not electronic monitoring itself.

It require some skills to manage for sure but a lot of full time job only require actual few hours of real works.