Ja das waren halt noch Zeiten als man noch Health-Claims frei erfinden und sie so um das Siegel eines reinen Qualitätssicherungsinstituts wickeln konnte, als ob die Behauptung von einem Herrn Dipl.-Chem. Dr.rer.net Fresenius käme.
Dank böser EU die da soviel Bürokratie erfunden hat, darf man das heutzutage leider nicht mehr.
It seems Chinese vendours are almost as bad as Tesla in this regard. However, European (maybe also South Koreans, I don’t know) largely coming back to physical controls for key features (and also real haptic buttons, not cheapo-touch buttons) though.
Yes, pretty insane. It shows how the stock exchange has completely lost contact with reality. At a time where Tesla has lost its leadership position in its market, has only two aging cash cow models on the market, is in the process of losing the most important global EV market to domestic competition and has no credible other big business model, the stock is rising to heights as high as many of its competitors combined with a lot higher sales, revenues and profits (combined). It is all based on flowery promises of the future.
This can go on for quite a while longer but eventually reality always wins.
A premium brand that cuts costs at any corner and even proudly proclaims though? Their main selling cars (model 3 and Y) are not premium cars, they are mid range cars and certainly not known for having a premium feel, rather to deliver a very good range for the price and the software stuff.
That argument carries enough weight that EURONCAP safety rating requires physical buttons for key features:
"Under the Safe Driving section of Euro NCAP’s safety rating, the key driving controls – indicators, windscreen wipers and washer, hazard warning lights, horn and eCall emergency button – should be operated by a direct physical input rather than hidden within a menu on a touchscreen. "
The “it doesn’t effect me” crowd is of the same kind that says, that controlling a phone during driving, doesn’t effect them or that they can drive just as safe after non-excessive alcohol consumption.
You do know the difference between “cheapest” and “cheap”, do you? What is its price point?
It is the company’s own content. They are running the LLM and the LLM is just a tool with no responsibility on its own. If the tool is unreliable that is Google’s problem.
What do gay Americans drive?
We are talking about that car not being cheap.
Making batteries exchangeable adds a lot of costs and overhead. The battery changing infrastructure is even a greater nightmare. Nio tried it and failed. With batteries getting better and better, this concept also is getting less and less feasible. It is really easier and cheaper to expand infrastructure of long range EV renting. That said, in Europe taking the train and renting an EV at the destination (range is not much of an issue then either) is probably the more relaxed option anyway, if a car is needed at all.
Ok, I get it that there are pro-China guys, plenty of Russian regime fans around as well. But the thing that really caught me by surprise is that there are seriously people entirely serious about how North Korea is heaven earth.
What you describe in your last line is not human rights. That is not how human rights work, every human has human rights and cannot lose them. If human rights are conditional they will never be applied to those who need them, the opponent. Then you can just get rid of them altogether and it makes no difference.
If there is internal conflict and one combatant kills another combatant it might be murder or not (depends on perspective) but it is likely not a crime against humanity. If you first catch them, then rape them, than torture them, to then kill them. It likely is a crime against humanity. Your paradox may work against tolerance but not necessarily against human rights, unless you proclaim that the raping part is necessary to oppose the intolerant
So no argument, except for “your argument does not count because I say so”. Ok. .ml style.
Or being able to adjust the A/C or ventilation blind without being forced to take the eyes off the road and redirect them towards a complicated screen layout.
The US is basically walling up its market against affordable compact cars. That can’t be the whole reason however. After all, Renault could sell the R5 or Twingo in the US if it wanted I assume. Are the regulations there so incredibly hostile towards compact cars, or do European companies resent producing compact cars as well and just do it in Europe because they absolutely have to, in order to survive?
That is a fascinating graph indeed. Ever wondered why official rape rates can be much higher in very progressive countries than in ultra-convservative countries where women have few rights, even if rape is illegal there? Hint: It is not because there are necessarily more rapes.
Because once you introduce any loopholes to human rights, they will always be exempted when they are being violated and therefore worthless. The concept that some rights should be unalienable, an unalienable right can’t be conditional.
Like I said, maybe you oppose human rights, that is a position one can take. I am just surprised to see it so fervently proposed here on Lemmy. I usually just see that position with the populist right, they are also pushing really hard on abolishing any legal framework to that end, is that something people here would want to see as well?
That was also the spirit of the Brno death march. So I guess you think it was a great thing?
Well, I think both of you have a point. The problem with “most people would slow down” is that this means dead children because of those who don’t.
Speed limits to have a role to play, however much better than a sign is indeed to create roads that naturally make people drive slower. Countless streets in Europe have been redesigned according to that principle, the most systematically in the Netherlands. Why? Because it works and it saves lives.
The US requires roads to built in a way that the “natural speed” would be insanely high, even in purely residential areas.