ano_ba_to

Being safer than humans is a decent starting point, but safety should be maximized to the best of a machine’s capability, even if it means adding a sensor or two. Keeping screws loose on a Boeing airplane still makes the plane safer than driving, so Boeing should not be made to take responsibility.

That’s a low bar when you consider how stringent airline safety is in comparison, and that kills way less people than driving does. If sensors can save people’s lives, then knowingly not including them for profit is intentionally malicious.

The tourbillon watches are very rare too. Don’t miss out!

On the contrary, this is actually the strategy to win the swing voters. Some of them just need to be haters and they win bigly.

“I’ll bet you wouldn’t say that joke about Muslims or Jews”. The joke they actually have in mind:

Air travel is generally safer than driving too, but every accident is studied thoroughly. Self-driving is fine, but anyone trying to implement it should be held to a high standard. Boeing slacked off and they’re facing some backlash.

“10 times safer than human drivers”, (except during specific visually difficult conditions which we knowingly can prevent but won’t because it’s 10 times safer than human drivers). In software, if we have replicable conditions that cause the program to fail, we fix those, even though the bug probably won’t kill anyone.

I was hoping after the graphical upgrade with Morrowind that they’d bring back interesting mechanics from Daggerfall, but they went the complete opposite direction for the money.

I’m glad some of them chose not to be enablers after Starfield.

Don’t get me wrong, nuclear energy is good. It’s just being used to power AI. That’s a waste. It’s being used so a corporation can profit, not to power homes. It’s being used to potentially replace humans, who need less power to function and whose power consumption cannot already be avoided anyway.