Blooper

joined 1 year ago
[–] Blooper@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

That's addressed in the article actually. They had to program it so as not to cheat when they found it actually trying to cheat.

[–] Blooper@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

What car did you end up getting?

[–] Blooper@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago (8 children)

I've always said that about one of my big reasons for buying an EV several years ago. By the time I'm in need of a replacement battery, it will be better in virtually every way - safer, faster to charge, higher capacity, lighter, and (potentially) cheaper. The first replacement battery might not be much of an improvement, but my 3rd might be light-years ahead.

[–] Blooper@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

They still do! Fastest wireless charge in the West.

[–] Blooper@lemmy.world 16 points 9 months ago (3 children)

It's different because you seem to be saying "workers should be able to be incredibly vulnerable to the whims of employers because employers should be good people". The other guy's response to that is "why would we ever assume employers are going to be good to their employees absent any mechanism to enforce said good behavior?"

[–] Blooper@lemmy.world -2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

To the contrary - I own a large home in an urban area and it is filled with my children. But we don't have to have a conversation - I was only pointing out the flaws in your logic. My tax bill will be $12k this year while my elderly next door neighbor's will be a fraction of that. Our homes are identical (3k sqft over 3 floors). She's not leaving because it would make little financial sense to do so. This is quite common.

[–] Blooper@lemmy.world -1 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Maintenance costs are probably fairly minimal given how little wear and tear happens in an empty nest. And property taxes for elderly folks are usually frozen or nearly frozen in place - meaning the next buyer will be paying a much higher tax on the same house because they won't qualify for those exemptions.

[–] Blooper@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

Extremely wasteful - and that's to say nothing of the obvious climate impacts from said waste. It's one hell of a drawback to what I would otherwise describe as a system that works pretty well.

[–] Blooper@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago

Not that I don't emphasize with your struggle - I just want to point out that there are people stuck in those "starter homes" with 5 or more kids who could really benefit from a 5 bedroom upgrade because they're at a point in their lives where they can afford it and they need it. The housing crisis we're living through produces victims up and down the income ladder.

Also this whole problem can be traced back to our absurd zoning laws blanketing most of California and the US. Still the boomers' fault, but not for decisions they're making today. Most of them are screwed right along with the rest of us. :(

[–] Blooper@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Yeah I was talking about you.

[–] Blooper@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago (3 children)

This is why we don't feed trolls

[–] Blooper@lemmy.world 23 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Because there's probably a significant number of affected rich folks who are retirees, vets, or both. Though, the propane you saw insinuates that it's the other way around - that a significant number of retirees and vets would be targeted by the new law. It's a pretty common tactic used against dumb people who can't tell the difference. Good on you for seeing through it.

view more: next ›