redfox

joined 9 months ago
[–] [email protected] 21 points 9 months ago (5 children)

clink

I appreciate rarely used phrases.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

cooking smells

I wonder if the smell of hamburger is offensive to vegans?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

I'm glad that helped. Was it the ability to dose down intentionally that helped?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

When you want to ensure the hate and ethnic cleansing propaganda is authentic...

/s

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

stooge president

Don't worry, we'll deliver that with a bow on. Or orange spray.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

tired of Russia's BS

I think Ukraine is.

And most of western Europe.

And US.

And...

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I appreciate/understand your envy. I'm not sure why everyone disagrees so much unless they have also lived under similar constraints.

Unless sarcasm.

Also agree with it might be perception or grass is greener like other comment 😉

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Well, has anyone done good statistics to show all the self driving cars are more dangerous than regular distracted humans as a whole?

We can always point to numerous self driving car errors and accidents, but I am under the impression that compared to the number of accidents involving people on a daily basis, self driving cars might be safer even now?

I'm thinking of how many crashes took place in the time it took me to type this out. I'm also curious about the fatality rate between self or assisted driving vs not.

I think we tend to be super critical of new things, especially tech things, which is understandable and appropriate, but it would be nice to see some holistic context. I wish government regulators would publish that data for us, to help us form informed opinions instead of having to rely on manufacturers (conflict of interest) or journalists who need a good story to tell, and some clicks.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago

That's a good point. There's law and then there's administrative policies.

I agree with the assertion that the mandate was probably more in CISAs realm.

In the end, it needed to happen. Maybe administrations will consider being less petty and just doing what everyone knows needs to be done. Ha ha. Right.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

This is great problem solving and a creative idea. I would support this concept for sure. I mentioned in another reply how I keep resisting paying a local news agency a subscription, mostly because of what you said. Frequency.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Brave is just Yet Another Chrome Reskin

Good point. I don't use it. I thought it stripped/blocked tracking though.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago

My guess is that because we’re constantly being told what to consume our minds work quite differently from what they would without advertising.

Our minds constantly have to resist intrusive advertising and psychological manipulation.

I stopped quoting because you made many good points. I imagine we could find some supporting material for this basic idea. It seems like a safe idea to say people adapt to the environment they are in, including our thinking patterns based on what we take in and feed our minds (books, media, streaming, conversation, etc).

I wouldn't be eager for a new tax, but the creative problem solving and imagining new ways to do things is good.

Also, thanks for the movie mention.

view more: ‹ prev next ›