Hildegarde

The judge seems to disagree with you. Like the judge, I have also read the statutes. Gross negligence, as far as the law is comcermed, is far greater than misreading one traffic signal one time.

The driver, as a presumably ordinary human, made an ordinary human mistake, that anyone could make. North American streets are designed so poorly that a single ordinary mistake results in fatalities.

Even if the court could grant the consequences you’re asking for it would do nothing to make roads safer.

The intersection requires pedestrians to wait, unprotected, in a dangerous location directly at the corner. The designer of the intersection recklessly endangered people to the most serious degree and is being let off scott free.

The vehicle that did the killing was an SUV. SUVs are large and heavy, with high blunt front ends. These are incredibly dangerous in a colission, far more likely to cause fatalities than modern passenger cars with a low nose that scoop under pedestrians in a colission. The car’s designer, manufacturer, and vehicle regulator who allowed this dangerous design onto the streets recklessly endangered people to the most serious degree and are being let off scott free.

This court isn’t even able to try most of those responsible.

Traffic lights encourage drivers to move quickly, and ignore their surroundings. They tell drivers to trust the intersection to be clear if the signal is green. This means that if a prudent and cautious driver makes the single mistake of misreading the light, it risks a high speed colission.

A 4-way stop would have slowed traffic, likely preventing fatalities in this case. Even if the driver missed the stop sign, the cross traffic would be slow enough to not push the SUV into the corner of the intersection. At the same time there wouldn’t be pedestrians in the corner, because 4-way stops allow pedestrians to cross quickly, and doesn’t require them to wait directly next to intersections.

This is an urban road. It was a choice to prioritize traffic speed and car throughput over pedestrian safety. This is the inevitable result.

You clearly weren’t paying attention for the twenty seconds it took to read my comment.

You can literally design roads without lights.

I agree with the judge’s decision. He was driving at a reasonable speed. He made a single error of missing the signal. That is far below the threshold of gross negligence needed for a conviction.

However, the court was asking the wrong question. Safety is systemic. Those involved with this death are those who design the roads, those who design the cars, those who make the laws, those who train and license drivers, who all have some responsibility. No justice can come from trying to pin it all on a single individual.

They have built a transportation system in which a single human error results in fatalities. That is the real crime.

Deaths like this are common and entirely preventable. Justice is when we redesign transportation so no one dies in similar situations ever again.

If we required periodic retraining and recertification for drivers this would be a non-issue.

This is a US and Canada problem. This is basically a non-issue in the rest of the world.

There are two standards for headlights, one established by the UN that applies to 99% of countries. Whereas the US and Canada have the other standard that is far worse for glare.

The global standard has strict rules on glare, requiring a sharp cutoff line at the top of the beam. The american regulations do not have this. American regulations do not account for headlight height off the ground, defining alignment purely with angles. An SUV or pickup with its headlights mounted above your eyeline can legslly shine the fullest part of its lights directly into your eyes at all times. In contrast, the international regulations account for height, and require tall vehicles to incline their headlights further downward to avoid dazzling other drivers.

This problem can be solved for new cars instantly by switching to the international standard. The auto industry is international. They sell in markets with the global standard and could switch their headlights immediately after a change in the law. This is an easily solvable problem.

Absolutely not. Motorway median metros are the worst kind. Build transit in better places, and remove highway lanes own its on merits.

Induced demand is a real thing. You can disinduce demand just the same. Remove lanes to decease traffic.

Banning half the voting machines is half of a good policy.

Ballots need to be counted by hand. No machine is trustworthy.

To sexualize men for women, you have to understand women.

To men, attraction is largely visual. So to sexualize a woman for a male audience means making her look attractive, and dressed in a revealing outfit. Swapping the genders doesn’t work. A visually attractive man in a revealing outfit is far more likely to appeal to either gay men sexually, or men generally as a power fantasy. To appeal to women you need a fundimentially different strategy altogether.

Consider erotic literature. Its a genre that is disproportionately popular with women. Its basically anti-porn, no visuals all story. Male characters in these stories are almost always sexualized by women for women. The attraction mostly from their choices and actions than appearance. You need a completely different approach.

Go read some smut. Talk to straight women about who and what they find attractive. You have to learn a lot about women to appeal to them. What they are looking for, and how they are looking for it is entirely different from men.

The issue with self driving cars is that the roads are not restricted access. Too many variables to do self driving in shared use spaces. We’ve had self driving cars, on dedicated roads, and they operate safely because they run with the assumption that nothing else will be in their way.

Elevators

You don’t determine demand for a bridge by measuring the number of swimmers.

These include electronic shelf labels, which advocates have warned could allow companies to instantly change grocery prices based on the time of day, weather, and other factors that influence consumer demand.

“Digital price tags are replacing paper ones. It’s happening because we are having cameras that are watching aisles, it’s happening because we have apps that are moving from search-based to predictive,”

You are not immune.

Mass manufacturing has replaced handcrafting in pretty much every field. Its not economically vibable to handcraft when mass produced alternatives exist.

Crochet is a craft that is not automated. You could probably build a crochet machine, but it would be incredibly complicated, expensive, and doing so would be slower than a human. Its not a viable craft to automate.

There’s a reason you don’t see crochet clothes in stores. It takes dozens if not hundreds of hours to make a crochet garment. No one would spend thousands to pay me to handcraft a shirt over several weeks when they can buy a mass produced shirt for a fraction of the price at a store.

Hand crafting is great, as a hobby, or an act of love. Its a terrible idea as a profession outside of very niche cases. Few can afford to spend 10-100 times more for something that is hand crafted when similar alternatives exist.

This is an america problem.

Europe uses the international standard for headlight regulations, whereas the US has their own standard which is far worse for glare.

US headlights don’t have the clear cutoff line. The headlights are allowed to throw significantly more light at the angles that should be dark.

Not only that, the regulations on beam alignment are based solely on angles, and do not account for vehicle height. This means higher headlights both illuminate more of the road, and dazzle more drivers, so automakers mount the headlights as high as possible. American trucks and SUVs are notorious for this. If you drive a normal car in the US, SUVs from the factory will have headlights above your eyeline, which means you get the full force of the headlight beam shined directly into your eyes. Which american regulations also mandate be brighter than Europe.

It must be nice having a real government. I hope to live somewhere that has one someday.

2008+18=2026.

2008 is chosen so that effective immediately, no one new will be allowed to smoke, but those who were previously allowed to smoke can continue.

Making the date 2026 means it takes 18 years to go into effect. There isn’t a good reason to wait.

The alternative would be banning smoking outright, which would be coercive to those who are addicted to something that was legal when they started. This policy is a timely but fair way to outlaw something.

Props are low volume specialty products for professionals. Airsoft guns are high volume toys for the mass market.

A theater or film production company can afford expensive quality props, because they are an organization with an orginizarion sized budget. Airsoft guns have to be cost cut and mass produced to a low price point because they sell to normal people with human scale budgets.

Also the brown furniture on the NCR service rifle is wood. Be authentic, learn carpentry.

Tech grifters latch on to the newest and most prominent buzzword. That is AI now. Most people still talking about blockchain in 2026 actually know things about it.

Iran is on one side of the strait, Oman is on the other. Giving Iran sovereignty would mean taking away sovereignty from Oman. Countries are supposed to be able to control their own coastlines and territorial waters.

The strait is narrow enough that there is no buffer of international waters in the middle at its narrowest. Giving one country sovereignty of the whole strait would mean violating the the sovereignty of another. Not a fair proposition.