Most Audi owners I know bring their own "boldness" and "confidence." They'll also remind you how bold and confident they are and why they chose bold, confident Audis. Enough that it runs out of their mouth like a bad case of Montezuma's Revenge.

I have been known to combat this (or people like this) by getting in front of people in the left lane and letting off the gas until they get over.

Refineries. Why ship oil far from the refinery? Thus, PADD III uses more foreign oil because more is shipped there.

This one is not my favorite because it is the best engineering marvel, but rather because it is fun. Every one of these is joyous to take. Except 30 eastbound to 820 south. It's boring.

Yeah, that's like any word which has an incorrect usage that has worked its way into the lexicon. While it's accepted, it was originally a perversion that has been made so commonplace it is now acceptable.

Believe it or not, some Americans actually use it properly and make fun of those who don't.

Considering gasoline alone is 18% of my yearly expenditures that's not a bad thing to see.

Whoa whoa whoa, no need to bring in thrust curves and science.

As an owner of a 5 liter engine which WILL outrun a WRX STI and BMW with a 3.5, I still agree that engine size doesn't always correlate with power. Or else 1940's cars would be king.

As someone who rarely has to stop in traffic, trying to use a bus would add huge amounts of time to my commute and lengthen it significantly, increasing greenhouse emissions considerably. Wherever you live, cars=freedom probably isn't true, but where I live, it most certainly is.

There, something we both agree with! So how long before you get tired of yelling at the screen and turn the TV off like all those Faux News schlubs?

That depends on your vehicle a fair amount. Some longer cars with limited visibility (like my camper-topped pickup truck) do have defined blind spots that need checking.

Karl Marx called, he wants his batshit crazy back.

So you don't have any rational response? Instead of sticking to the subject at hand, you start attacking the supposed intelligence of the poster? Well, now we all know who won that debate. You must be new to the internet.

If you're picking and choosing which innocent people it's okay to kill and who it's not okay to kill on the virtue of arbitrary 'selfishness,' you're standing on shaky moral ground, which is why I think your position is laughable as you claim that you, an adopter of a robot car, would be any less selfish than the next…

Between my grammar corrections and your poor spelling and instant personal attacks, it seems we're both pretty good at the internet.

Yeah, might even have to break out the paste wax.

Well, now. One of those sentences has correct spelling and grammar. We can work on the other. Do you realize it's selfish and immoral not to use spell-check when it's available? You are clearly not a capable speller, so a computer should replace you.

Equating robot cars as a more important moral choice than consuming ten times what an African child does isn't making things better. And I can see why you didn't want a logical response, because you're only capable of ad hominem attacks.

Ah yes, and those Somalians will also have robot cars and cocktails. So kind of you to share with the millions dying in other parts of the world.