That kind of range is such a waste.
The overwhelming majority of people don’t drive a tenth of that on a given day. 500km is plenty. Even for roadtrips. Then the charge time would get down to 5min!

I thought they are safer.
ICE cars catch fire every day.

Now I’m curious…

Okay. After some AI assisted recearch. In most ways, EVs and ICEVs make no real difference in accidents, when controlled for vehicle age. Which makes perfect sense, since they’re the same in all the ways that matter here. However fire rates are dramatically lower for EVs. Like 1/60th as frequent. Though EV fires are much worse. They burn hotter and are extremely difficult to put out. But EV fires are so rare that fire related fatality data is too small to be statistically meaningful. So that’s good.

I don’t think that was an untended consequence.

Maytak audio is fantastic.

You mean the Homelander who told his son: It doesn’t matter if you kill people, because they’re humans? That Homelander is a better father than Clark? Because Clark is a hypocrite?

If they’re already using it what are you trying to convince them of?

I’m not an investor. Sorry.
So how do you tell the difference between a scam and a failed buisness?

Is it a scam or just a filed business?
How can you tell the difference?

There are no real alternatives to Google Messages. There are lots of SMS apps. None of them support RCS, because Google won’t let them. So any alternatives will be a downgrade at lest in that regard. Usually a number of others also.

I’ve used most of the SMS apps out there, none are nearly as nice a Google Messages. It’s a shame, but it’s true. I’ve kinda settled on Textra for now, but I’m always looking for something better.

No we were talking about Signal.
That’s what the comment you responded to mentioned.

You get that using any other SMS app and Signal.
Literally the only gain is having one app instead of two.

If you don’t evangelize all your contacts into using it, you wouldn’t get any benefit from using it for SMS anyway. That’s why they removed SMS support, it confused people about the privacy of SMS messages.

There you go. You understand. Showed self awareness, and growth.
This feeling I have, is not unlike pride.

Good night, and good luck. I wish you the best.

You just skipped the whole beginning and jumped into the middle.
You do that a lot, skip forward and back in this conversation, expecting me to follow.

The hypothetical role reversal was literally my very fist comment, not something I brought up later. It was the question I said you didn’t answer.

And no I never suggested the comic wasn’t propaganda until you gave me your definition, and it didn’t fit.

My hypothetical was designed to root out your double standard bias in applying the propaganda label. A bias that became indisputable long ago. Your unwillingness to even consider that possibility has been my primary entertainment during idle time at work the last couple days. For that I thank you. But I’m off work for the next four days. Want to pick this up then?

Yah… Compelling rational there. Solid refutation. Class A debate tactic

Blond hair isn’t a single color. There are lighter and darker individual strands that make up the whole.

What single color would you pick? Give us a hex code.

Those are fast children

That was yesterday. More than a dozen comments ago. Are you not interested in this conversation?

You decided to engage with it finally, by giving a definition you think makes you right. Then when I point out it doesn’t. You ignore that, rewind, and claim you don’t want to talk about it.

Okay. You don’t have to. You could just stop.

I never proposed a hypothetical or what-if. I only directly referenced your definition. Then explained how systematic patterns work among random noise, and why you can’t apply them to an individual instance. I did include a real world example. But that’s not a what-if or hypothetical, that’s real and actual. and also only an example, not really meaningful to the point itself.

Edit: I feel like I’m assuming too broad of a knowledge base for you. If you don’t understand something please just ask instead of dismissing. I’d be happy to explain.

But your definition doesn’t describe individual instances of anything, only systemic patterns. How can you be sure an individual instance is intended as part of the pattern?

It’s the same kind of problem as pinning down an individual storm as being a result of climate change. You can’t realy, because individual data points aren’t themselves a pattern. You can say this point cloud makes a pattern. But you can’t be sure any individual point is part of the pattern or the background noise.