Scarring, pain when moving. Both can be permantent. Hard to say the extent without more information, and things are often exagerated early on to try to scare the defendant to settle early.
456 posts • joined 6 Feb 2015
Shirely this requires manufactures to, oh I don't know, fucking provide updates!
That's the weak link. Right now they ship insecure shit and never provide updates because they can't be arsed, and aren't in any way compelled to do so.
Right so even if the car had alerted the driver at T minus 1.3 seconds, there was no time to react, never mind stop.
Suggests the collision detection algorithm is seriously flawed if it can't properly classify a high-probability collision outside the human thinking time required to take action.
Indications are the driver was watching some streaming thing from Hulu at the time of impact, instead of watching the road.
This at least means she wasn't doing her job properly. Negligence leading to death suggests she is personally liable. If Uber expected her to do housekeeping tasks instead of watching the road, Uber should reasonably be considered liable too.
You're suggesting they wouldn't happily take the money...?
These are politicians remember. Saying they want to close the situation and move on doesn't mean they actually want that. I'm sure they'd grudgingly "settle" for weekly mountains of cash in the meantime.
The reason is we're boned, as at all local, regional and national levels of government there is no actual clue what to do in the event of no deal.
Just like they never expected to lose the referendum so had no contingency plans when they did, they have diddly squat plans for no deal because they don't believe it will/can happen. Failure of imagination.
...CMA will be able to identify how efficiently the online advertising market is working...
It's not. At least not for consumers.
...and what remedies, if any, are needed...
1. Kill it with fire;
2. Nuke it from orbit;
3. [Insert preferred cliched destructive remedy of choice].
Or... and hear me out here... you could, oh I dunno, have an actual employee walk/drive/drone the cable route and eyeball it. You know. A "job".
Can I have my $1.5 billion now?
Seems like someone will have to do that anyway. To verify the AI positive are indeed true positives, and especially if the AI spews out a bunch of false positives which will rapidly lower trust in the results.
Solution looking for a problem.
Satan will be snowboarding to work.
Also, when are ASA going to grow a pair and actually punish retailers for misleading consumers? Saying "must not appear in this form again" is the same as getting away with it.
Make an example of them, enough that it's not absorbed as cost of doing business: you made £X from this dodgy promo where you mislead your customers, your fine is £X * 1000.
Any sovereign nation e.g. US can impose sanctions. It's up to the rest of the world to decide if they agree or not.
Hell, Vatican City (world's smallest nation by area) could do the same if they felt like it. Would anyone take notice...? Probably not. But it doesn't mean they can't do it.
If the rest of the world doesn't agree they are free to continue dealing with e.g. Iran so long as they do it outside US judicial juristicion.
The issue here Meng is alleged to have presided over, and hid, involvement of Huawei's US tentacle in trade deals with Huawei's Iranian tentacle.
Which like it or not puts it firmly in US judicial territory as an illegal breach of their sanctions imposed on Iran.
Sometimes it's just not worth the effort trying to convince someone they're wrong.
Or they don't want to be drawn into a flame war.
Or you can't argue with stupid.
Lot's of reasonable reasons to downvote without backing it up.
To help ensure the Code of Practice is extended to cover all the bodies it should have covered from the outset, in a nationally coordinated and cohesive manner, while ensuring plod and various large public bodies can't take the piss.
Noble, ambitious, definitely required, but I'm not optimistic for success and even if it ever pans out they'll still take the piss.
Why? Methinks maybe a point was missed. She hasn't been there as long as he, since she only just started and presumably starting at the lowest rank in the salary band (let's assume he also start at the lowest rank in that same salary band), while he's been there years.
In a truly fair system, loyalty/tenure/inflationary/whater pay rises will apply the same to both over time, so once she's been there 5/10/whatever years she should be at the same salary he reached after his 5/10/whatever years.
Or are you suggesting she should start with no time served at the same salary band he is on after time served, just because... eqaulity...?
Lawyers are the only ones who ever score in class action law suits.
My inner sceptic says that's the only reason they bother bringing them.
My inner pragmatist says it can be a lot of work, hence cost, to bring a class action.
My inner sceptic reminds my inner pragmatist lawyers need work, are often parasitic scum sucking moluscs, thus look to create work benefiting themselves far more than their clients. Shit, we can't even starve the bastards.
Yeah leaving huge piles of grey dust and rock, great big holes in the ground... shit like that would really spoil the moon.
Poor efforts at wit aside, you make a valid point. Humanity hasn't got a great track record of careful exploitation. Who would enforce such rules though? It's frontier territory out there. We'd need some kind of space-based law enforcement. A "Space Force" if you will.
Everyone is entitled to that. The trick is finding such a job. Many people don't, a lucky/skilled some do.
Are you saying those having a dream job somehow aren't entitled to it? That they should be doing something they hate instead?
Indeed. It (dons asbestos underwear) ignores the glaring fact that certaintly in the UK women are legally entitled to 12 months paid maternity leave, while men are not.
2 weeks paternity leave really isn't the same thing.
Not sure about the US but there many enlightened countries with similar rules.
On this basis alone there's are a vast difference. Men and women doing the same job in the same company, to the same level on the same terms, are not actually on the same terms.
To be truly comparative, one needs to compare the additional cost of such female-only benefits perhaps aggregated over the average employment duration of those claiming maternity leave. This alone may drop the difference significantly.
Anyone calling this out regularly gets flamed as a sexist mysoginst pig.
Oh well. Flame on!
Oops, lander not satellite.
Further research suggests this experiment was never meant to survive past lunar nightfall, therefore achieving what it set out to. That or the Chinese are saying that was the plan all along, to save face.
Whole thing hasn't been helped by the original pics being of the control experiment back on Earth, not the actual experiement on the moon. Just gives it an air of incompetence, or fakery, or both. Not saying those are true, just these kinds of mixup can lead to such thoughts.
Yeah it's not like they couldn't already know the lunar night gets really cold.
Could have at least simulated effect of that here on the dirt ball before bunging it into space, then built the satellite to maintain the correct environment throughout.
Their commercial footing is just fine.
I appreciate it's much easier to run your mouth and not bother to look shit up, but you perhaps should research the reasons behind the current shiny design before berrating it for looking like something out of an old comic. The switch from carbon fibre to high grade stainless steel is not for shits and giggles.
I suggest looking up things like "Hot metal structures", "thermal mass", and the reasons for the surface being polished. Apparently the shiny finish is better at withstanding and rejecting the heat from the re-entry bow shock, than a matte surface.
Though how long it remains shiny under those conditions... be the mother of all detailing jobs after landing.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019