Get a scraper/brush and keep it in your car.
Use it before you start driving. Don't just clear a "porthole" to see out of. Clear the snow off the roof too. If you don't it'll fly off and hit the guy behind you or it'll slide down over your windshield.
If you don't have your scraper, a credit card will work in a pinch for the windshield.
Don't pour hot water over your windshield to melt ice. At best it just doesn't work, at worst you'll crack the windshield
If you're new to driving on icy/snowy roads, get a sense for how/when your car will break traction. Find an empty parking lot, accelerate a bit and then brake increasingly harder until you start to slide. This will give you a feel for the conditions under which you'll lose traction to brake. This is also a good way to learn how to recover from a slide.
smh Apple playing 5th dimensional chess again making stupid design decisions to get the all important lemmy advertising for free.
Tim apple is truly a genius
They were talking about warehouse workers, not corporate employees.
No rank and file US-based employees at Amazon are getting years of severance. They don't do that.
Is the criticism that they told drivers about how the Idaho stop worked? If the Idaho stop was going to be more widely adopted, it's a reasonable assumption that there would be a public education campaign so people knew what to expect.
Either way though, it's a study meant to test a hypothesis and the outcome suggested that Idaho's approach may be a good one.
If you're wanting an admission that the study's results may not hold up under further testing, sure. Admitted. But the study as a first step is pretty reasonable.
Firefox can do without Google being the default fine. What they can't do without is all the money that Google pays them to make Google be the default.
??
Doesn't everyone pick their ideals to care about?
You know, I don't disagree with your ultimate point. But if you look through this comment chain you should recognize that the way you chose to make it is:
- Needlessly antagonistic, and (therefore)
- Not very effective
If you wanted to convince anyone or provoke interesting discussion I think you failed.
In the future, you should just make your argument/statement instead of asking "clever" bad faith questions.
He may have PTSD and he may have had 1,000 hours of firearms training, but if you empty your magazine the way he did, under the circumstances he did, you're incompetent to be a police officer. Period.
And even he apparently recognizes that since he resigned (though whether he'll just go get hired the next town over is probably a decent bet).
It's a race to the bottom.
Yes, you can decline to opt in, but the guy next to you (or the guy next to him) will opt in and sell his AI voice package for less than it costs to employ a real person. And unlike a real person, the AI voice package can work 24/7 on 10,000 productions at the same time.
If anyone can opt in, then no one can really opt out.
Is this a good thing? For the bottom line of the people making the games, sure. And maybe 3% of that savings will trickle down to the consumer.
But it's pretty bad for the voice actors.
Now if we can just get all the fatties in America to read your post we'll have this thing licked!
Most conspiracy theories are bullshit, no doubt. But not all of them are, and it's pretty hard to judge which might be true by the claims alone, because by nature they are pretty fantastical.
In 1974 before the Church Committee revealed it, you'd have dismissed anyone telling you about MKUltra and I wouldn't blame you.
But it really did happen.
Did Epstein kill himself? Probably? But the circumstances are definitely eyebrow raising...
Most (maybe all) age discrimination statutes only protect people over 40 so may not apply here depending on the specifics.
It's all good my bro. I understand where you're coming from.
What you're saying is a nice thought, but it's a game theory failure.
In a perfect world, yes, America would not have elected a narcissistic maniac. But in the real world, we did. And Ginsberg, who knew she was in poor health (had cancer like a bazillion times) opted to take a chance.
Maybe she just calculated poorly, or maybe this was a magnificent act of putting principle above pragmatism. Either way, Roe v. Wade was still overturned and so much for RGBs legacy. The smart move for an 80 year old woman with colon cancer is to find an offramp that lets her preserve her legacy.
I get it if you disagree, but I don't think it's hard to understand why people blame her at least in part for this mess.
Ironically what you wanted was her to politicize her position. She was above that
That's great for her and all, but it was a choice that had the disastrous outcome of allowing Trump to replace her with Barrett. Ginsberg doesn't have to live with that, but we all do. Thanks RBG.