BlameThePeacock @ BlameThePeacock @lemmy.ca

Posts

4

Comments

1,935

Joined

2 yr. ago

Sure, but that's just a dumb way to do it when even in third world countries everyone is rocking at least a basic smartphone.

Both of those first two studies (the third one is not a study) say that there's actually not a significant harm, especially just for nudity.

Not to mention the fact that they're both really old (pre-2000) and based on data collected from the 1970s to the 1990s and pre-date home internet access and only from data collected in the US(actually only in 3 cities in California)

I mean, depending on who/why you're calling, you can just use Discord. Just add someone as a friend and you can message/voice chat directly with them anytime you want. They have a reasonable mobile app in addition to desktop and even browser options.

Maybe if some orange turd wasn't busy fucking up everything from board games to airplanes politics wouldn't come up so much.

Hard to have a conversation without it when there's a massive tariff on every single product related to work, hobbies, and even just living.

The public transportation infrastructure wouldn't hold up to that large a spike in demand

Not to mention that public transit doesn't even exist everywhere in the first place

Then on top of that, you'd have to pay for public transport while probably still paying off the car loan (which wouldn't just magically disappear because they break)

Also, car prices for everyone would go through the roof as demand shoots way up for a couple of years, since there isn't enough supply from the remaining companies to cover a 1 in 5 replacement for the entire country in any less time.

Then you'd have to deal with the millions of non-functional vehicles, towing and recycling them.

I simply mean it can't be used. Doesn't even need to be as bad as doing it while driving.

A foreign power able to disable the transportation for even 1 in 5 personal vehicles would be devestating to the country. The economic effects would be massive.

This has happened, the girl was found guilty of manslaughter.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Conrad_Roy?wprov=sfla1

There aren't safeguards to protect us from a car manufacturer intentionally disabling vehicles.

https://www.theverge.com/2015/7/21/9009213/chrysler-uconnect-vulnerability-car-hijack

I mean, it's literally already happened, and this was a hacker doing it so it's even easier for a car company to do it.

Any vehicle with OnStar can also be remotely disabled as well, it's literally advertised as an anti-theft feature. https://www.onstar.com/tips/stolen-vehicle-assistance-helps-stop-thieves

If your car can be contacted remotely (almost every modern vehicle) I guarantee you that it's possible for the manufacturer to brick it. It may not even require an update, there could be a hidden command in the existing software since the software is not publicly available to validate, nor is it being validated by the regulatory authorities.

What does that have to do with how proprietary the auto systems are?

It's far easier to detect a compromise on Windows or Linux than on a custom embedded system for which there is zero public documentation.

You said "we already implement safeguards against this"

No there isn't.

No there isn't

It's far easier to detect software issues on a computer compared to a car, they're much more open ecosystems for software

You're forgetting something critical, cars are computers and can be updated or even bricked remotely with the current systems in place. This is an unacceptable risk from a foreign power, only a close ally (not the US anymore) should even potentially be able to supply these.

I would actually like to see any sort of over the air update systems be banned, it should only be possible when plugged in physically.

The only thing that should be possible remotely is reading info.

It's likely not even a US op, and division like this benefits places like China and Russia even more.

"privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it."

That's the wording in the constitution. They just say that undocumented migrants amount to an invasion and they can suspend it.

It's not like the supreme court is going to override them on that.

It's not even that entirely

You can't build X here unless every component is also produced... here. The component factories can't be built here here until there's factories building the subcomponents for them, AND a buyer for them here.

A button up shirt needs cotton -> chemical treatment -> dyes -> fabric, base chemicals > plastic pellets -> buttons, AND the machines to do all of those processes. It's like 7 or 8 different factories just to produce a shirt with buttons on it. Imagine how many factories it is for anything more complex.

Then in comes your point of needing commitment when it's not even certain for more than a week, nobody is going to build out entire supply chains in that scenario.

Nope, it's 3

The third one was technically a friendly fire shoot down, but it still ended up at the bottom of the same sea.

https://www.businessinsider.com/us-aircraft-carrier-red-sea-cost-navy-millions-dollars-mishaps-2025-5

Don't forget the new submarine fleet, three new vessels in the last two weeks.

WEALREADY HAVE TRADE DEALS WITH EVERY COUNTRY

We don't rip them all up when we change prime ministers or something equally as stupid