Yes, thank you for quoting exactly what I said??

You are quoting the serious or fatal injury stats. The overall injury accident rate, though, as quoted from the article: “When all injury-causing crashes were considered, Waymo performed better. Its robotaxis were involved in 67% fewer injury crashes per million miles than New York City’s for-hire vehicles.”

No, they actually have fewer total accidents per mile than actual taxi drivers. Did you read the link you posted? They are involved in 1.5 times more accidents with severe or fatal injuries per mile, but that is comparing Waymos driving in more open cities at higher speeds to taxis in the very slow speed, high traffic city of NYC where the primary use case is different. Also, the only fatal accidents (2 of them) have been the fault of other cars, not Waymos, so it’s kinda unfair to include those.

And here and there, it’s possible to look at pricing and conclude it’s pants-on-head bananas. Trading and therefore price action is dominated by algorithms which amplifies hype cycles. Who couldn’t see SpaceX as being overvalued?

But that’s the problem. Many of us definitely knew SpaceX was overvalued. It should have been a no-brainer to short this stock at IPO… however, look at Tesla stock. That shit should have cratered years ago but still hasn’t. I wanted to short this stock, but I didn’t trust the Musk morons to not continue humping his sack. Even when you can see that something is pants-on-head bananas, there are enough idiots out there (and enough insider traders) making shit irrational.

I contributed first by no longer posting there and only rarely lurking on niches that aren’t popular here. I am contributing more now that they have blocked old.reddit, because ain’t no way I’m even lurking with the new interface.

This ruling doesn’t get into that question. Based on how courts treat refusing to take a breathalyzer, I’m guessing it opens you up to being detained for 24 hours on suspicion of a crime, giving them time to obtain a warrant. A different write-up says that if you do not give a password, they can detain your device and make you wait; but you are not required to give up the password. No other write-ups I can find mention the password issue.

I know previous rulings have said that Face Unlock does NOT count as forcing your password and is allowed by police in searches. When I go on international trips, I disable Face Unlock on my work phone before going to the airports to block that pathway since my phone contains company proprietary information and Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI). I have nothing embarrassing or illegal or incriminating on my personal phone, so I usually don’t bother.

This is about dealerships pre-installing an alarm system and trying to upsell people at paperwork signing. If they turn down the option, the dealers just don’t activate the alarm system. Some dealers are shadier about it than others. I went into final docs signing without ever being told about the $600 option and only barely noticed it before I signed. I was like, “uhhh, what’s this?” Luckily I was aware of other bullshit upcharges dealers tack on like underbody coatings and stuff, so I made sure to go line by line on the price. $600 for an alarm that could be bought for $200, plus I think it also had a recurring yearly fee for it.

So all of those people were informed that their vehicle did have this privacy and security invasion. There was just no way to have it uninstalled.

Does Nintendo get a refund? I thought the tariffs were paid by the people who import the product, not the manufacturer. Meaning Best Buy or Amazon would be paying the tariff and entitled to a refund, not Nintendo.

I guess there is also Nintendo NA, who might be the importer who then distributes to Best Buy or Amazon???