pauljones
pauljones
pauljones

Oh God, another "American cars can't turn!" troll.

Ha! I actually wound up coming in about the same when I was tinkering with it. But I'd be willing to bet you can do the exact same thing for the 4C when it finally comes out. And, as a bonus, you'll get the ugliest headlights in the world thrown in for free. And Spiegel, I know you've seen some ugly headlights before.

I just can't find this thing sexy in any way. It's those damn headlights that just absolutely kill it in every way. Remember the "Smashing!" meme with the head of Nigel from that old Nickelodean cartoon poorly photoshopped onto the face of some actress? That's exactly the feeling I get every single time I see the

Not quite; my bet is that a base C7 would likely be able to overpower the hell out of the 4C and outrun it in every meaningful way.

The point of Jezebel is not discriminative in any way. Jezebel is a website tailored to the interests of a given demographic, just like Jalopnik or Deadspin. In the case of Jezebel, that demographics is women. It's no different than how Jalopnik or Deadspin cater to their audiences. In the case of Jezebel, it is

To put it in base terms, essentially, yes.

That's damn well the funniest comment I've seen today.

Marine salvage is an expensive undertaking, and quite rightly so. At the end of the day, the cost of raising and scrapping the ship will notably exceed the cost of actually building the ship to begin with.

Long story short: both.

I want this:

Read through the rest of my prior comment.

"Actually, it can and does. When I pull up google maps on my phone in congested areas, the roads will be color coded red, yellow, or green depending on how smoothly traffic is flowing. It's a handy and very accurate tool... I assume it works by tracking the speed of all the other smartphones in traffic and having

"Well, a car with infrared and thermal camera would have better road vision than a human."

Well, I think you somewhat misunderstand, probably because I wasn't clear enough. I gave two aspects of technology that I didn't care for - one being artificial intelligence, and the other being autonomous cars. I did not assert that they are one and the same. Artificial intelligence I deem as being things like the

An autopilot does little more than point the aircraft in the correct direction. There are, in fact, autopilots that are capable of landing an aircraft on their own, but at all times there is a human present to handle any potential situation that the autopilot system simply can't accommodate. On the other hand, that

I believe that the purpose of technology is to make it easier for us, as humans being, to do the things that we need to do on a regular basis. Technology is something that we use to make our lives and our actions more efficient, that we may use the time saved to accomplish even more.

I don't know about that.

I completely agree with that. It's something of an awkward position to be in, as in the case of autonomous cars going mainstream, there is no middle ground; it's either everyone has one or no one has one. There are a great many people that I'm sure would be better off with them, but I don't count myself as one of them.

As a guy notably under Mercedes-Benz buyers median age (and also notably poorer than the median income of said buyers), I will say that I do find some of their newer offerings to be interesting. I like both the CLA and the GLA; while I wish they were more traditional RWD vehicles, from everything I've heard about the

Someone just wanted the job more.