That's irrelevant. The plaintiff bought the FSD package and his attorney (not prosecutor, I missed that this was a civil suit not criminal trial) will likely argue that it introduced confusion on the part of his client. It doesn't matter that the FSD package wasn't actually in use if the plaintiff believed it was (or, more importantly, that he believed it could do things that it could not due to the confusing terminology)
Jonathan Michaels, an attorney for the plaintiffs, in his opening statement at the trial in Riverside, California, said that when the 37-year-old Lee bought Tesla's “full self-driving capability package” for $6,000 for his Model 3 in 2019, the system was in "beta," meaning it was not yet ready for release.
The way it is marketed is not in line with it's functionality. I expect the prosecution will claim the term "Full Self Driving" is confusing to consumers
The problem is that people don't know how to search for scientific articles, and aren't versed in understanding what makes a study a good one.
Nearly all "alternative medicines" have been scientifically studied. The difference between them and regular medicines are that the real medicines have a clear clinical benefit.
I would prefer the option to watch in silence (game sounds only), honestly. I love the experience of going to a game and I don't need people telling me why plays are important or that a player just exceeded some random stat to enjoy it.
Remember that the free version of Unity is completely free and no money gets sent to Unity. Boycotting all Unity games only hurts the devs, except when you know the game was made with a Pro version
It mostly benefits the website that is being visited. If an ad company sells ad spots that don't convert to sales, the organizations buying the ad spots will be less likely to buy them in the future, potentially hurting the ad company
All I see is someone loudly proclaiming that they believe it is fine when their team commits atrocities, and that they can't realize they're spouting conspiracy theories.
I'm looking forward to feeling bad when I listen to this on my next commute because there's no way I'm watching a 42 minute video on violin plots for my Saturday night 😂
Nice deflection to the point that Putin's Russia is the only one behind Ukraine's invasion, with many nations opposing the clear and unprompted invasion. No counterpoint to that?
The concept isn't, I agree. But it also isn't a useful idea, either. There really doesn't appear to be any benefit to using NFTs in any meaningful application, or at least nobody has pitched one that isn't either a grift or a way to appear "trendy" by reinventing the wheel.
No, they wouldn't have. Because owning a link to a thing doesn't mean anything, no matter what that thing is. They were only valuable because people didn't understand NFTs and wanted to get rich quick.
Putin invaded Ukraine by himself, and the rest of the civilized world is against it. Not really a surprise that the US is also against Russia's constant land grabs.
Dr Cog @ Dr_Cog @mander.xyz Posts 1Comments 282Joined 2 yr. ago
That's irrelevant. The plaintiff bought the FSD package and his attorney (not prosecutor, I missed that this was a civil suit not criminal trial) will likely argue that it introduced confusion on the part of his client. It doesn't matter that the FSD package wasn't actually in use if the plaintiff believed it was (or, more importantly, that he believed it could do things that it could not due to the confusing terminology)