You're not allowed to drive cars like that in a functional society. When you go for your compulsory car checkup it wouldn't pass the required safety standards.
What is allowed and what actually happens are two very different things, my friend.
In the neighbourhood I live, there's a guy who visits someone here several times per week. His headlights are broken, the tires are worn smooth, the exhaust is loud beyond all reason. Given the general state of the vehicle, I don't have high hopes for the brakes.
I reported it to the police. I'm really not the type of person to do that, but this is worse than anything I've seen. Of course nothing happened. I didn't even get a reply. They don't give a shit. Some day that guy is going to rear-end my car and break my neck because his brake lines finally gave out.
Also, the compulsory car inspections only work for honest people. People with illegal mods will put back the stock parts for the inspection, and switch them back after. I'm not gonna say the inspections are worthless, but it does make a lot of money for the state and the private actors who run the inspection centres.
EDIT to add: They made a law recently that the inspector has to take a photo of the car inside the inspection centre, because there was so much fraud happening with vehicles just being "inspected" on paper.
I think the point they're making is that the ICE cars that OP is complaining about also aren't supposed to be driven in a functional society. The difference is that mostly wealthy people can afford EVs: https://ampo.org/electric-vehicles-are-out-of-reach-for-most... thus they stay maintained and have a polished image.
I think they are more accessible now than when that article was written. My wife and I bought a mid-trim Hyundai Kona Electric for under $35,000. Besides, lots of people buy used cars, and there are crazy deals on used EVs. I've seen Bolts go for under $15,000. 2 year old ID.4s are selling for under $20,000 in my area. You may not find a $5,000 beater, but EVs are penetrating further into the middle of the market now.
There are also lower ongoing costs for maintenance and fuel.
There is still the secondary wealth filter of having a place to park and charge, of course.
What I think is missing today is a way to challenge someone else's car. A few independent reports should force an early checkup, and if passed soon after the accusation, the accusers should get their own just to have something at stake.
It's missing because letting the minority of Karens harass everyone like that would cause the political will for the inspection programs to evaporate instantly.
Second, places with high touch governments already lose out on business due to registration arbitrage. Your proposal would dump gas on that fire.
while I agree, there's many places where the compulsory car checkup is tied to your relationship with the mechanic. I don't think my parents ever had a "valid" car but the certificate always was. It never felt wrong (although I think it is) but more like mutual aid or service.
There’s also the fact that nearly 1/4 US states require no emissions or safety checks whatsoever [1]. So everything is valid by default and realistically the only thing stopping you from driving a literal rust bucket, with tailpipe dragging, poor combustion, or modified emissions filtering (like modifying your truck so you can roll coal down Main Street) is it a cop feels like pulling you over for it
"Withdrawal Clause: Countries may withdraw with three months' notice if "extraordinary events" jeopardize their supreme interests. "
Doesn't seem that hard to leave it.
I think it is interesting. Is there any other company in a position today that could put together endorsement quotes from such high ranking people across tech?
That's because of financial links. They are so intertwined propping up the same bubble they are absolutely going to share quotes instantly. FWIW just skimmed through and the TL;DR sounds to me like "Look at the cool kid, we play together, we are cool too!" without obviously any information, anything meaningful or insightful, just boring marketing BS>
> They are so intertwined propping up the same bubble they are absolutely going to share quotes instantly.
Reading this line, I had a funny image form of some NVidia PR newbie reflexively reaching out to Lisa Su for a supporting quote and Lisa actually considering it for a few seconds. The AI bubble really has reached a level of "We must all hang together or we'll surely hang separately".
It could be an indicator that Apple is not as leveraged up on NVIDIA as to provide a quote. Cook did make a special one of a kind product for the current POTUS, so he is nothing if not pragmatic.
Quotes from known names in a boring corporate press release are absolutely standard. It gives journalists a hook to build a story. “Elon Musk says new Nvidia tech is…”
You're right they usually do this, I checked some press release from last year. The big difference is that it's now the CEO that had to write the blurb instead of (e.g.) a vice president of product.
Yeah I imagine that when the stakes are as high as they are with Nvidia they pull out the biggest names possible, partly to drive media but also as social proof. “All these important CEOs are prepared to go on the record - not just corporate droids who have to because it’s their job”.
From the article, their claim is only about AI-generated assets (both in the game and its marketing), not logic. This is what people usually refer to when they say a game is "AI-Free"
reply