top causes, not factors

if your R&D costs make your business unprofitable, something's going to come along and topple it, same as how "smoking" isn't a cause of death but lung cancer is a very major cause of death

Looks like the sides are on street parking which is better than huge lots as you have an argument to restrict it to residents as it's in lower supply, and also serves to reduce the speed of cars on the road, so actually better than being a 4 lane stroad

And yet (at least from an outsider perspective) libertarians are closer to democrats than republicans

Republicans seem all about telling you what you can and can't do (can't get hrt, can't get an abortion, can't smoke weed, must marry and have children etc.) whereas both democrats and libertarians are largely "just live your life" but that could just be because all the american parties seem so financially right wing that they're basically the same in that respect

The Democrats stood behind a zombie for way longer than they should have... I think the politicians in the party are just as small brain

That's not even applicable here, and I thought we'd moved past spouting that on every post when it became apparent that meta actually weren't trying to kill the fediverse

The whole point is developing products to an open source standard, adding unneeded or complex features to ensure competition can't keep up and gain market share, then shutting down your product and killing the whole standard.

How does buying a company that makes proprietary products then closing down that company even come close to being the same thing?

Bringing politics into a shitpost?

Saying you're not 12? (I appreciate the Andrew reference but frankly it's a stretch given he's a side character and that's the wrong age range)

I've got an inkling you're not 12 but 14...

I'd disagree - it hurts both the EU and the withdrawing nation to have a nation withdraw, so saying "if you withdraw you will end up coming back, but on terms more beneficial to us" is a good move for the EU to further decay eurosceptic movements around Europe. Letting places rejoin on the same terms would encourage eurosceptics as they'd say "we can always rejoin on the same terms"

I disagree - on paper sure they would, but at the end of the day the UK is the ≈2nd biggest economy in Europe (UK and France make up 2nd & 3rd and who is bigger changes every couple of years), unlike Georgia or Moldova or whoever else where their joining is barely noticeable.

That means that the EU is more likely to want the UK to join, vs smaller countries wanting to join the EU, although it would be mutually beneficial of course - the UK would likely increase the EU's power a little more than the EU would increase the UK's power, but saying that hides the fact that it'd probably be a 10+% increase in both cases.

Of course the EU could make an example of the UK if they were want to rejoin, but if they were to look at it objectively then they'd most likely reach the conclusion that the negatives of making the concessions they made before are far outweighed by the additional collective power of having the UK as a member.

Ok so sure there's nothing on Tesla's autopilot, however that's not to say there's nothing on autonomous systems...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8431415/

In 2018 and 2017, 6,735,000 and 6,453,000 traffic crashes occurred in the United States, which resulted in 33,919 and 34,560 deaths, respectively.

https://www.orsa.org.uk/reducing-occupational-road-risk/reducing-driver-error-accidents/

In reality, car crashes aren’t accidents and 94% are due to human error In 2011, British police officers attended 118,404 road traffic collisions (figures from the Department of Transport). In 42% of these crashes, the most frequently reported factor was that the driver ‘failed to look properly’. The second most commonly listed factor for 21% of the crashes was the driver ‘failing to judge the other person’s path or speed’. The third most common contributing factor was the driver being actually ‘careless, reckless or in a hurry’ and this accounted for 16% of the crashes.

There's your stats on humans being reckless and dangerous when driving cars, and of course there's nothing concrete for fully autonomous cars because they aren't legal anywhere, but here's some stats on pretty much every existing driver assist - notably they all prevent accidents compared to just a human driving: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8431415/

It really isn't a stretch from the 3 most frequent crash causes being human error and human assistance tools reducing accident frequency a bunch to say that all these systems coming together (as they cover near enough everything to do with driving a car) would be safer than a human driver, but I don't doubt you'll deny it as you're asking for something impossible to give (as governments haven't allowed full autonomous driving cars yet, so there's no statistics on their use) and so aren't actually looking for information but to confirm your biases and feel like you've "won", despite the fact there's no objectively unsuspicious data on the exact situation you're asking for meaning that you can't prove yourself right either beyond "I'm a little suspicious of this company so I must be right"

Start with the numbers on humans driving drunk, tired, on their phone, while having a conversation, bored or in practically other state and work backwards. Driving is dangerous as fuck and it's pretty much universally accepted that the biggest challenge for autonomous vehicles is humans doing unpredictable and stupid shit

Have you seen their rated capacity?

They're like lifts which say they'll fit 20 people in yet even as cramped as they can get it's at most maybe 80% of that number

But it also takes away from the original nature of AirB&B which is rent out your home while you're away or your personal second home