Uh...because the self-driving cars can’t anticipate someone stepping on into moving traffic, it is pointless?

You are focusing on edge cases. Everyone is. There is a ton of bad driving habits that are already removed with self-driving cars. Look at the big picture and it is obvious that it is already safer, even if these edge cases still occur.

It is easy to be better. With self-driving you already remove of bunch of factors from the bad driving equation; abrupt stopping, cutting off other cars, crazy lane changes. Just those factors alone make self driving better (also safer). Then there are these edge cases where people step out in front of cars, which…

One of my pet peeves is when someone clearly misses their exit or turn and instead of accepting their mistake they still try to make it, cutting way over the lane markers. - or stop in the median area between the freeway and off ramp and wait to squeeze in.

Does this guy think he won the fight?

There is a high speed rail in the works in CA for the Silicon Valley area. Apparently the feds are putting in 3.3 billion for it. Who knew? I still don’t necessarily agree, but if the feds are already funding these kind of projects than it doesn’t seem fair NY and the rest of the NE can’t get a piece of the pie.

Cool, then can I please get a high speed train from San Diego to L.A. please, because I am tired of dealing with the traffic and California pays way more in taxes than N.Y. does.

Unless we are allowed to interpret the Constitution or Gibbons v. Ogden, nowhere does it mentioning anything about funding, only regulating. There is a huge and obvious difference between the two. I am not trying to be pedantic here, but if you siting the Constitution or legal cases it has to be 100% clear and I…

Dude, as I said, I am from California, so let’s talk about a fucking tax burden. Funding for state projects should not come from the federal government 

Does regulate have a different meaning for you than it does for me?

Hey, you don’t have to tell me, I am from California. But don’t use all the federal money being paid by the NE as a reason why the feds should pay for a NE specific project. Those are two different problems.

You would think that the state taxes from all that money pouring through the north east would be enough to start the project. If it truly does affect that many people, then the states should be making it their top priority.

I’d be OK with that too.

I recently googled Trypophobia and now the lead picture is making me a little nauseous.

I thank God everyday for giving us the Common Names Committee of the Entomological Society of America. What would we ever do without them?

New pants are a must, as those have a permanent brown streak in them.

The first thing you are going to need is proof that repealing net neutrality is actually affecting consumers. I am not saying it eventually won’t, but if you want to use it to gain some seats and there aren’t any negative affects present yet, they are just going to look like the boy who cried wolf. 

Wait...so does it?

Leave 50 cent alone! The guy barely has two quarters to rub together!

Did you not read the article?