Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | qmr's commentslogin

Why do you own such a vehicle then?

You must not fear it that much.


As others pointed out, your argument is a fallacy. Technically a "Tu Quoque", in practice this explains it better: https://iea.org.uk/yet-you-participate-in-society-in-defence...

“Ahh, and yet to participate in society.”

This is a direction all manufacturers are going into, so there is little actual choice. And buying used is not a real solution; where do tomorrow’s used vehicles come from?


My vehicles save one of my motor bikes are all over 20 years old.

That works for you personally, but what are people going to do 20 years from now? Fight over the dwindling stock of 40 years of vehicles?

To say nothing of the tradeoffs that come with an older vehicle (safety and pollution).


There are people today driving 40 year old vehicles. Or 60 year old vehicles. I even saw a model A at the grocery store lot once. There will be used cars for me.

You really don't get it, right. The age is not a problem.

And let be real, the 60 years old car, while there are some aspects they do better than modern one, overall they are much worse than mordern car.


Ehh. I'm still going to own a manual transmission car the rest of my life. New market isn't marketing to me going forward so I just won't participate in it. I'm sure there will be a million likeminded people keeping these puppies going as they've done.

Most people i know having old cars also have at least 1 modern car. The main reason they drive old car is the feeling. Either their childhood dream, or just nostalgia. "Modern car suck" is not on their top 5.

A chunk of smart features are either legally mandated (eCall) or soft-required for "safety" (Euro NCAP lanekeeping etc).

all cars made in the last 15 years do it

Economy cars like base model corolla are still normal cars.

My cars are all older than this.

None of them have turned into pumpkins.


Starting own car company is not a viable solution for a typical person.

In a sane world this would be a 1A violation on its face and thrown out by any sensible judge.

We live in interesting times, truly.


No talk of overreach: “threatening “criminal liability” if they “further the propaganda”

> In June, the Justice Department intervened in an NAACP lawsuit against Elon Musk’s xAI over dozens of gas turbines the company was running without air permits to power a data center it maintained in Tennessee. The department asked a federal judge to throw the case out, arguing that the NAACP “threatens American national, economic, and energy security.”

> To make the point, the government filed a sworn declaration from Cameron Stanley, the Pentagon’s chief digital and artificial intelligence officer. Stanley swore to the court that Grok was “a matter of paramount national security.”

Seriously, wow. Time to clean up our act.


They mean since the government has zero competent people in it and Elon got to choose the AI, the whole government relies on Grok to do everything.

What are you doing in VR for fitness?

Not sure how to date this list is, but here is one way to look at it. https://vrhealth.institute/vr-ratings/

I have found VR an easy way to get moving in a fun/low friction way at the end of the day, instead of heading somewhere else. Depending on what you are doing, it isn't going to cover everything, but moving something is better than nothing.

Personally, I found Synth Riders a good way to queue up 60min continous activity that I enjoy.


The list is too long, but essentially almost every VR game will force you to move since you’re no longer controlling an avatar with buttons. You are now inside the game instead of viewing it from outside of a box, so you’re going to be moving and punching.

For me the biggest calorie burners are boxing games. Beat Saber and others like Synth Riders are great too. Then there are fitness focus apps like Body Combat and even one for rowing machines.

Hopefully, Meta can convince HR firms that this is a fitness device that is eligible for FSA like benefits.


Why do you feel he is a clown?

Because he's seeing success and fame, while the parent (most frustratingly) isn't.

If it didn't matter to them, they wouldn't have commented what they did.


Success and fame in...selling an AI slop phone?

If that's something to be jealous of, I guess?


His behaviour, mostly

He's primarily an entertainer, doesn't mean he's a clown.

I think there are worse clowns in corpos without careers on YouTube.


> UK government insane demands for mandatory OS level client side scanning malware on every device to block all nudity.

The fuck?



My gripe with iPhone is hunting white balance. Always happening when I'm shooting video.

I wonder if newer phones / camera apps are better.


The 18 Pro enables 'pro' features in the default camera app that finally allows you to set the white balance, shutter speed, aperture, but not the ISO.

It's about goddamn time.

Excited to use this feature in 2-5 years when I can get one cheap.


That assertion is not true at all and your comment overall just reeks of Apple apologism.

The average user may not understand the technical details of bokeh but they will certainly have an opinion on what is pleasing to the eye.


I remeber photographers talking about X has "not very nice bokeh" probably since I met a first photographer when phones were monochrome and had no camera. No one beside photographer cared then, no one will care today.

To most people its just blur and they don't care that it is not just blur.


If your assertion was true, it logically leads to "camera quality doesn't matter man, only photographers care about that, to most people it's just pictures"

There are details, all of these are details; but saying that "iphone5-level-cameras are good enough form most people" is both true (obviously it sold and millions were satisfied with it) and false (most people would notice today that iphone5s take worse photos than latest-gen). All the details add up to image quality that _is_ noticeable even to the laymen.


> only photographers care about that, to most people it's just pictures

This is largely true, when it comes to photos of other people/people they care about.

I'm a wedding & family photographer part time, and at nearly every wedding I shoot, the photos the clients and their guests favorite the most from the galleries are usually the quick candid snaps where the subject has an expression they like or are doing something fun. It could be a blurry, grainy, dark mess of a photo and it will consistently be their favorite photo of the day.

For most non-photographers, the subject of the photo is what matters and is all they will notice. Almost no one is making a distinction between bokeh shape, or noise (unless its so obvious as to completely ruin the photo), composition, etc.

All that to say, photo quality is only one very small part of the equation.


Even if they don't care about bokeh per se, they can still find pictures with really bad bokeh to be ugly.

I'm not a photographer and I think the bokeh makes the picture look bad because the tree looks so weird that it's distracting. I'm not one who normally thinks about bokeh, but it's glaringly bad.

"IP-encumbered seeds" is a wild phrase.

> Will there be meatballs?

> Maybe.


They died from car crashes.

Not accidents.

Fixing this broken language and attitude is a step towards ending these deaths.


> Fixing this broken language and attitude is a step towards ending these deaths.

Is it? The person you responded to sees car crashes as an important issue to solve yet still calls it "car accidents". So maybe it's not that important after all.

Nothing makes me saltier than language policing; I'd say fixing _that_ broken language is more of a step towards fixing issues than the actual language itself.


It's not about language, it's about culture. If you saw someone running through a crowd with a knife you'd expect them to be thrown in prison. But someone speeding through a neighborhood? Or dangerously overtaking a cyclist? No bother.

If the person running with the knife hurt someone they'd be a murderer. But the car? Oh, it was just an accident.


You think they were doing it on purpose every time someone is in an accident, or you think every time someone says "accident", they're referring to or you're purposely missing the nuance to make a point nobody agrees with, or you think that people in general are not annoyed when someone drives recklessly?

If it's the first, I dunno - you're wrong. People aren't. If it's the second, aside from insurance fraud, nobody is trying to fuck up their day and lose a functional car in the process, maybe getting seriously injured. If it's the third, you're just being annoying and nobody will take your point seriously if you can't make it more saliently. If it's the last, go check out reddit. There are at least half a dozen subs where people post bad drivers and everyone in the comments is collectively grumbling.


Are they plane crashes or plane accidents? (Replace "(air)plane" with "car".)

Accidents. The aviation industry is the worst example you could use. Every single time, the goal is to find the issue, NOT the blame. The industry is insanely safe in large part BECAUSE they refuse to frame it as a crash, and instead frame it like an accident.

But if there is blame, pilots will never fly again. They don't receive a slap on the wrist and an "oh, you".

Well yeah, it’s not a faultless thing. If you’re being reckless and insane they obviously fire you, but literally nobody does that. It’s not an easy job to get, you’d be throwing away a great career. Closest you’ll come is someone getting fired for drinking and piloting.

There is a strong push in many sectors to stop using the word accident, so your assertion that this is a point no one agrees with is false.

Oh, you think I was being literal

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: