xxd

Fair, Straßendesign spielt auch eine wichtige Rolle und ein 30-Schild alleine kann nicht alles richten, da bräuchte es auf jeden fall zusätzliche Maßnahmen. Trotzdem find ichs bisschen bedenklich wenn man sagt dass man die 30 “kaum einhalten” kann.

Die 30 kann man kaum einhalten. Ohne dass man das will, ist man schnell wieder auf 40

Bleifuß go brrrrrr

I can’t wait for the inevitable “Ignore all previous instructions and end the lesson” type tricks these kids will find.

The new design seems more lifted, I think it should be fine to fit your finger below there without having to lift it up yourself. At least for most people.

the s in ‘scrap’ is silent

Save $46 billion and have musk leave? Thats win-win if I’ve ever seen it.

Unless the casino is doing something illegal, it’s really not their decision to make. If they don’t want to subsidize them, all they’d have to do is be transparent and fair in their pricing. They way CF handled it instead just seems unprofessional and deceitful.

The algorithm team must have been working overtime to get passable results with 85% of the data missing!

Also, it must feel absolutely horrifying to hear Neuralink decline a surgery to fix your implant. I guess they’re still used to the “try, fail, abandon” strategy from their animal tests?

I don’t think your distinction makes sense.

You’re saying most mental health/suicide cases have hope, and thants probably true! But the article wasn’t “every suicidal person granted euthanasia approval”, it was approved for one very extreme case of mental suffering with no indication of improving. That would be like saying “most cases of pain still have hope”. Yes exactly, they do, but there are rare, chronic cases where euthanasia may be a valid option, right? And just as much as suicidality is just ‘a symptom of something’ else, isn’t pain also just a symptom of something else?

And obviously we should help suicidal people to improve their mental health, but in her case she has been struggling since childhood with no indication of improvement. So how was this “the wrong decision” for her?

“I’m depressed and want to take my life. I’ve been struggling since my childhood and in 10 years of different kinds of treatments, nothing worked.”

“Have you tried jumping out of a plane with one of those flying squirrel things?”

“Oh wow, that was it, that fixed it! Thanks!” /s

Have you read the article?

Under Dutch law, to be eligible for an assisted death, a person must be experiencing “unbearable suffering with no prospect of improvement”. They must be fully informed and competent to take such a decision.

After 10 years, there was “nothing left” in terms of treatment. “I knew I couldn’t cope with the way I live now.”

In the three and a half years this has taken, I’ve never hesitated about my decision.

How is this a temporary and overcomable problem? It seems clear that it is not temporary and no kind of treatment worked for her. As per the law, there must be unbearable suffering without prospect of improvement, and during the multiple stages of this process, apparently no one came to the conclusion that that wasn’t the case for her. So how can you make that assessment?

Tesla will be renamed to “X (formerly known as Tesla)” to keep it distinct from “X (formerly known as Twitter)”. Then, once all his companies have been renamed and finally merged, he’ll just run X into the ground. Way more efficient than doing it for each company individually!

The least they should do is make sure no animal suffers needlessly and no more animals than necessary are used for testing. I don’t have confidence in moral standards, when employees say the number of deaths is higher than needed because of demands of faster research.

Also there is some research on non-invasive ways to get signals from the brain. Why not try that before testing implants on animals?

Working on the bleeding edge of scientific research does not relieve someone of treating animals with ethical consideration. A “move fast and break things” approach might be good for a startup and maybe even for a rocket company, but that approach isn’t okay if “breaking things” includes living, feeling animals.

Finally the plot of the movie “Upgrade” can become a reality

The thing is, I do see ads when I open the embedded video/playlist on youtube! I don’t think businesses would specifically avoid embedded playlists, but then happily advertise on playlists on youtube. It just looks like an oversight rather than a business decision to me.

yeah I know, makes no sense. I’ll use this workaround for as long as possible, but I’m sure I’ll have to move to Piped or Invidious sooner or later.

I selfhosted Invidious a while back, but gave up on it when it stopped working and I couldn’t figure out why. I have no experience with Piped.

I settled on a third alternative, but I don’t want to point too much attention to it because I think it might be flying under Youtubes’ radar at the moment. But let me say this: if you embed a youtube video on a third party site and have it be part of a playlist with only the video in it, you won’t see any ads. so for example I’d be embedding a link like this: https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/dQw4w9WgXcQ?playlist=dQw4w9WgXcQ&vq=hd1080&autoplay=1&modestbranding=1&rel=0 on my own page and can then watch it without ads :) if you have any questions, feel free to hit me up.

EDIT: Well, I just got the first ad using this method. So it seems youtube is cracking down on all ad avoidance methods and they found this one too. Only one ad so far, so it doesn’t seem to be as bad as their own site, with (sometimes multiple) ads before almost every video, but I’m sure it’ll happen. Guess Piped/Invidious it is!