This isn’t a court of law. I don’t need to prove that a car isn’t great to not buy it. I can choose not to buy it for perfectly false reasons. Many consumers do. Calling them idiots isn’t usually the path to profitability.

The big question on my mind at least, is what happens after the crash? Can I reset the system myself, or do I need to tow it to a dealer? Can I still make some use of a vehicle when some of it’s system aren’t functioning? In other words, how fault tolerant is this whole setup.

So if you buy a car from company X, that turns out to be an unreliable, expensive, heap of crap, it is illogical to refuse to buy another car from the same manufacturer?

I’m less worried about a car not knowing and adress, than I am about it sitting frozen for hours trying to calculate the best route. Do you really think every manufacturer will build systems that will never glitch?

Once a few manufacturers started putting in infotainment systems, vehicles that didn’t have them started looking obsolete to consumers. When selecting a vehicle to buy, people put a very high premium on having a large screen in the dash, even if it will be the source of their frustrations.

If the same people aren’t in charge of developing the system, than the same people are in charge of selecting who is developing those systems. Or perhaps the same people are in charge of selecting the people who will do the selecting. Either way, you go up high enough, you’ll find the same people. Responcibility is…

So newer vehicle, built to higher crash standards, are safer than older vehicles built to less demanding crash standards. One would hope that’s the case.

Indeed, the replacement is coming as soon as the robots are good enough to make good burgers consistently (news articles say they are, but I don’t know for myself).

To complicate things further, sometimes manufacturers move production off shore to be made by foreign robots.

That hasn’t been the case in my experience. Automation isn’t just cheaper, it’s also better, at least at doing those jobs that are suitable for automation. There is a great deal more consistency. Machines don’t have bad days when they don’t feel like working, they don’t try to sabotage production, or produce bad part…

Manufactuing in general, that is, the making of stuff, is doing just fine stateside. Manufacturing jobs are not, because we automate everything we can, so we don’t need the sort of workforce levels we did in the 60s.

“When you think about it, it is pretty strange that we spend over half a trillion dollars a year on defense against other humans, when we could all just as easily be wiped out, or at least partially, by a giant rock just going about its business in space. It shows just how near-sighted the human race is, especially…

I don’t know. I can’t determine his entire personality by a single action.

I don’t doubt that he is an awful person, but I do doubt his kids will be better off without a father.

It’s a bit taking back just how much work the pilot has to do to start his engine (especially noticable on the F15 video. The pilot looks like he is trying to monitor 12 different gauges at once).

I must be misunderstanding you. Aren’t you proposing that we fit all bicycles with identical motors and let them race with those? Won’t those be motorized bicycles? Aren’t those basically very light motorcycles?

Sort of, if I understand what you are saying right.

We already have motorcycle racing.

The motor in the seat post is connected to the cranks via gears, and gears make noise. There is also a need to place all these gears somewhere, so it could be easier to find.

I use a G700 for cad work, and it works fantastically. The single greatest benefit was to program 2 of the thumb buttons as copy and paste.