• [OT] Drunk kills two people and has zero concern for victims

    From Rhino@no_offline_contact@example.com to rec.arts.tv on Tue Jul 7 04:59:43 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

    I've been looking at bodycam videos a bit lately and have seen some
    truly stunning things. This one strikes me as particularly appalling:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTkbEcKBaoY [12 minutes]

    A woman student close to graduation at a private college goes out
    drinking and is driving home when she hits and kills two people. She is
    more than 3 times the legal limit in her state (Illinois) and is
    laughing and smiling as she does the sobriety tests even though she's
    already been told that both people have died at the scene.

    While at the hospital - I'm not sure why she's there since she's unhurt;
    maybe formal blood tests? - she learns that she'll be going to jail that
    night and won't get bond because she killed two people. She asks about
    the next day; will she get her car then? The officer explains that her
    car is totalled. She asks how she's going to get to school as if it's
    his job to provide a replacement car. Not once does she express the
    slightest remorse for her actions.

    How does someone get that way? Completely indifferent to anyone but
    herself, not a shred of insight that she'd done something horrible and
    not a bit of guilt? Does booze alone have that effect? I have to ask
    because I don't drink and never have so I just have no experience with
    being drunk.
    --
    Rhino

    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From The True Melissa@thetruemelissa@gmail.com to rec.arts.tv on Tue Jul 7 08:02:28 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

    Verily, in article <112if60$2l2or$1@dont-email.me>, did no_offline_contact@example.com deliver unto us this message:
    How does someone get that way? Completely indifferent to anyone but
    herself, not a shred of insight that she'd done something horrible and
    not a bit of guilt? Does booze alone have that effect? I have to ask
    because I don't drink and never have so I just have no experience with
    being drunk.


    No, booze alone does not have that effect. It doesn't make people
    indifferent to others. Plenty of people have injured someone while drunk
    and been distraught.

    It does affect memory. If she wasn't forming memories, then while at the hospital she didn't know why she was there or what happened. She
    eventually blows 0.264, which is hugely drunk. She might be having
    memory problems, not understanding what's happening because there's no continuity.

    She giggles nervously a few times during the sobriety test, but she's
    not laughing at the victims. The voiceover seems to be trying to make
    her sound worse.

    She's awfully open. She called the police herself, and she volunteers
    that she's carrying marijuana (apparently still illegal there).

    Ever notice how *everyone* who hits someone with a car always insists
    that the victim "came out of nowhere"?
    --
    The True Melissa - Canal Winchester - Ohio
    United States of America - North America - Earth
    Solar System - Milky Way - Local Group
    Virgo Cluster - Laniakea Supercluster - Cosmos
    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Rhino@no_offline_contact@example.com to rec.arts.tv on Tue Jul 7 10:37:39 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

    On 2026-07-07 8:02 a.m., The True Melissa wrote:
    Verily, in article <112if60$2l2or$1@dont-email.me>, did no_offline_contact@example.com deliver unto us this message:
    How does someone get that way? Completely indifferent to anyone but
    herself, not a shred of insight that she'd done something horrible and
    not a bit of guilt? Does booze alone have that effect? I have to ask
    because I don't drink and never have so I just have no experience with
    being drunk.


    No, booze alone does not have that effect. It doesn't make people
    indifferent to others. Plenty of people have injured someone while drunk
    and been distraught.

    It does affect memory. If she wasn't forming memories, then while at the hospital she didn't know why she was there or what happened. She
    eventually blows 0.264, which is hugely drunk. She might be having
    memory problems, not understanding what's happening because there's no continuity.

    She giggles nervously a few times during the sobriety test, but she's
    not laughing at the victims. The voiceover seems to be trying to make
    her sound worse.

    She's awfully open. She called the police herself, and she volunteers
    that she's carrying marijuana (apparently still illegal there).

    Ever notice how *everyone* who hits someone with a car always insists
    that the victim "came out of nowhere"?


    That seems natural enough to me. I would assume that inattention was the
    major cause of the collision: the driver was looking at something OTHER
    than the road ahead so was stunned by another car or pedestrian being
    there unexpectedly.
    --
    Rhino
    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From shawn@nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com to rec.arts.tv on Tue Jul 7 10:43:58 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

    On Tue, 7 Jul 2026 10:37:39 -0400, Rhino
    <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

    On 2026-07-07 8:02 a.m., The True Melissa wrote:
    Verily, in article <112if60$2l2or$1@dont-email.me>, did
    no_offline_contact@example.com deliver unto us this message:
    How does someone get that way? Completely indifferent to anyone but
    herself, not a shred of insight that she'd done something horrible and
    not a bit of guilt? Does booze alone have that effect? I have to ask
    because I don't drink and never have so I just have no experience with
    being drunk.


    No, booze alone does not have that effect. It doesn't make people
    indifferent to others. Plenty of people have injured someone while drunk
    and been distraught.

    It does affect memory. If she wasn't forming memories, then while at the
    hospital she didn't know why she was there or what happened. She
    eventually blows 0.264, which is hugely drunk. She might be having
    memory problems, not understanding what's happening because there's no
    continuity.

    She giggles nervously a few times during the sobriety test, but she's
    not laughing at the victims. The voiceover seems to be trying to make
    her sound worse.

    She's awfully open. She called the police herself, and she volunteers
    that she's carrying marijuana (apparently still illegal there).

    Ever notice how *everyone* who hits someone with a car always insists
    that the victim "came out of nowhere"?


    That seems natural enough to me. I would assume that inattention was the >major cause of the collision: the driver was looking at something OTHER
    than the road ahead so was stunned by another car or pedestrian being
    there unexpectedly.

    That seems to be a normal thing now thanks to cell phones. Hell, just
    look at the people walking around the streets glued to their phones.
    Not a clue as to what is going on around them. No surprise they take
    that same behavior into their cars.
    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Rhino@no_offline_contact@example.com to rec.arts.tv on Tue Jul 7 12:53:52 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

    On 2026-07-07 10:43 a.m., shawn wrote:
    On Tue, 7 Jul 2026 10:37:39 -0400, Rhino
    <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

    On 2026-07-07 8:02 a.m., The True Melissa wrote:
    Verily, in article <112if60$2l2or$1@dont-email.me>, did
    no_offline_contact@example.com deliver unto us this message:
    How does someone get that way? Completely indifferent to anyone but
    herself, not a shred of insight that she'd done something horrible and >>>> not a bit of guilt? Does booze alone have that effect? I have to ask
    because I don't drink and never have so I just have no experience with >>>> being drunk.


    No, booze alone does not have that effect. It doesn't make people
    indifferent to others. Plenty of people have injured someone while drunk >>> and been distraught.

    It does affect memory. If she wasn't forming memories, then while at the >>> hospital she didn't know why she was there or what happened. She
    eventually blows 0.264, which is hugely drunk. She might be having
    memory problems, not understanding what's happening because there's no
    continuity.

    She giggles nervously a few times during the sobriety test, but she's
    not laughing at the victims. The voiceover seems to be trying to make
    her sound worse.

    She's awfully open. She called the police herself, and she volunteers
    that she's carrying marijuana (apparently still illegal there).

    Ever notice how *everyone* who hits someone with a car always insists
    that the victim "came out of nowhere"?


    That seems natural enough to me. I would assume that inattention was the
    major cause of the collision: the driver was looking at something OTHER
    than the road ahead so was stunned by another car or pedestrian being
    there unexpectedly.

    That seems to be a normal thing now thanks to cell phones. Hell, just
    look at the people walking around the streets glued to their phones.
    Not a clue as to what is going on around them. No surprise they take
    that same behavior into their cars.

    I know there have been serious accidents and very possibly fatalities in Toronto from people who were looking at their phones walking out into
    traffic. Serious concerns were expressed about the numbers of people
    affected and they may even have taken legislative actions, although I'm
    not sure what those were. It would seem unlikely to give the police
    power to fine pedestrians for using their phones outdoors.
    --
    Rhino
    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From The True Melissa@thetruemelissa@gmail.com to rec.arts.tv on Tue Jul 7 13:47:23 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

    Verily, in article <112j2vk$2tqsv$1@dont-email.me>, did no_offline_contact@example.com deliver unto us this message:
    Ever notice how *everyone* who hits someone with a car always insists
    that the victim "came out of nowhere"?


    That seems natural enough to me. I would assume that inattention was the major cause of the collision: the driver was looking at something OTHER
    than the road ahead so was stunned by another car or pedestrian being
    there unexpectedly.


    Exactly. To me, "He came out of nowhere" is not an excuse, because it translates to "I wasn't watching the road."
    --
    The True Melissa - Canal Winchester - Ohio
    United States of America - North America - Earth
    Solar System - Milky Way - Local Group
    Virgo Cluster - Laniakea Supercluster - Cosmos
    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From The True Melissa@thetruemelissa@gmail.com to rec.arts.tv on Tue Jul 7 13:49:34 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

    Verily, in article <234q4l5s8covinc3s9787qeslap4qrjoga@4ax.com>, did nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com deliver unto us this message:
    That seems to be a normal thing now thanks to cell phones. Hell, just
    look at the people walking around the streets glued to their phones.
    Not a clue as to what is going on around them. No surprise they take
    that same behavior into their cars.

    Just yesterday, I saw a commercial pushing a car with an autodetect
    system. The idiot driver was looking at her phone when someone stepped
    into a crosswalk, and the car's system... didn't blow the crosswalk.
    There's a closeup of the woman who didn't quite die.

    In essence, this commercial is telling me that their system will make it
    safe for me to screw around when I'm supposed to be piloting the
    vehicle. I find that appalling.
    --
    The True Melissa - Canal Winchester - Ohio
    United States of America - North America - Earth
    Solar System - Milky Way - Local Group
    Virgo Cluster - Laniakea Supercluster - Cosmos
    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Travoltron@Travoltron@fakeemail.org to rec.arts.tv on Tue Jul 7 14:29:10 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

    There are sure a lot of low IQ DEI students in college these days. Just
    the way she talks, I expect her to say "Duh" before each sentence.
    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Your Name@YourName@YourISP.com to rec.arts.tv on Wed Jul 8 09:32:54 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

    On 2026-07-07 17:49:34 +0000, The True Melissa said:
    Verily, in article <234q4l5s8covinc3s9787qeslap4qrjoga@4ax.com>, did nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com deliver unto us this message:

    That seems to be a normal thing now thanks to cell phones. Hell, just
    look at the people walking around the streets glued to their phones.
    Not a clue as to what is going on around them. No surprise they take
    that same behavior into their cars.

    Just yesterday, I saw a commercial pushing a car with an autodetect
    system. The idiot driver was looking at her phone when someone stepped
    into a crosswalk, and the car's system... didn't blow the crosswalk.
    There's a closeup of the woman who didn't quite die.

    In essence, this commercial is telling me that their system will make
    it safe for me to screw around when I'm supposed to be piloting the
    vehicle. I find that appalling.

    Which is exactly what many Tesla drivers do, thanks to Elon Muskrat
    promoting his idiotic nonsense as "full self-driving" even though it is
    not and the car's instructions (and most country's laws) specifically
    state that the driver must still be paying full attention and be ready
    to take over instantly. The number of YouTube videos and similar that
    show these useless cars doing something stupid when driving themselves
    is astounding. It also doesn't help that most of these silly systems do
    not actually work properly either. Yet another reason why
    "self-driving" cars should NOT be allowed on public roads.


    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Your Name@YourName@YourISP.com to rec.arts.tv on Wed Jul 8 09:37:44 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

    On 2026-07-07 17:47:23 +0000, The True Melissa said:
    Verily, in article <112j2vk$2tqsv$1@dont-email.me>, did no_offline_contact@example.com deliver unto us this message:

    Ever notice how *everyone* who hits someone with a car always insists
    that the victim "came out of nowhere"?

    That seems natural enough to me. I would assume that inattention was the
    major cause of the collision: the driver was looking at something OTHER
    than the road ahead so was stunned by another car or pedestrian being
    there unexpectedly.

    Exactly. To me, "He came out of nowhere" is not an excuse, because it translates to "I wasn't watching the road."

    In most cases, yes. But there are times when an unseen pedestrian,
    cyclist, child, animal, etc. does suddenly appear from a side alley or
    from between two cars - this can be espeically true of joggers wearing earphones or idiots too busy looking at their phone.

    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From moviePig@nobody@nowhere.com to rec.arts.tv on Tue Jul 7 22:33:18 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

    On 7/7/2026 5:32 PM, Your Name wrote:
    On 2026-07-07 17:49:34 +0000, The True Melissa said:
    Verily, in article <234q4l5s8covinc3s9787qeslap4qrjoga@4ax.com>, did
    nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com deliver unto us this message:

    That seems to be a normal thing now thanks to cell phones. Hell, just
    look at the people walking around the streets glued to their phones.
    Not a clue as to what is going on around them. No surprise they take
    that same behavior into their cars.

    Just yesterday, I saw a commercial pushing a car with an autodetect
    system. The idiot driver was looking at her phone when someone stepped
    into a crosswalk, and the car's system... didn't blow the crosswalk.
    There's a closeup of the woman who didn't quite die.

    In essence, this commercial is telling me that their system will make
    it safe for me to screw around when I'm supposed to be piloting the
    vehicle. I find that appalling.

    Which is exactly what many Tesla drivers do, thanks to Elon Muskrat promoting his idiotic nonsense as "full self-driving" even though it is
    not and the car's instructions (and most country's laws) specifically
    state that the driver must still be paying full attention and be ready
    to take over instantly. The number of YouTube videos and similar that
    show these useless cars doing something stupid when driving themselves
    is astounding. It also doesn't help that most of these silly systems do
    not actually work properly either. Yet another reason why "self-driving" cars should NOT be allowed on public roads.

    Here's Google's AI (quoting the NYTimes):

    "Self-driving cars are statistically safer than human drivers.
    Real-world data shows fully autonomous fleets, like Waymo, have up to
    92% fewer pedestrian injury crashes, 85% fewer injury-involving crashes,
    and a significantly lower rate of serious-injury collisions compared to
    humans driving on the same roads."

    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From BTR1701@atropos@mac.com to rec.arts.tv on Wed Jul 8 02:52:19 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

    On Jul 7, 2026 at 2:32:54 PM PDT, "Your Name" <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:

    On 2026-07-07 17:49:34 +0000, The True Melissa said:
    Verily, in article <234q4l5s8covinc3s9787qeslap4qrjoga@4ax.com>, did
    nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com deliver unto us this message:

    That seems to be a normal thing now thanks to cell phones. Hell, just
    look at the people walking around the streets glued to their phones.
    Not a clue as to what is going on around them. No surprise they take
    that same behavior into their cars.

    Just yesterday, I saw a commercial pushing a car with an autodetect
    system. The idiot driver was looking at her phone when someone stepped
    into a crosswalk, and the car's system... didn't blow the crosswalk.
    There's a closeup of the woman who didn't quite die.

    In essence, this commercial is telling me that their system will make
    it safe for me to screw around when I'm supposed to be piloting the
    vehicle. I find that appalling.

    Which is exactly what many Tesla drivers do, thanks to Elon Muskrat promoting his idiotic nonsense as "full self-driving" even though it is
    not and the car's instructions (and most country's laws) specifically
    state that the driver must still be paying full attention and be ready
    to take over instantly.

    I don't understand this. Why do Teslas have to have a driver behind the wheel but I see those Waymos driving around town all by themselves with no one inside? If it's legal for a Waymo, why not a Tesla?

    I have to admit, it would be pretty handy when I have to fly somewhere to have my own car drive me to the airport, drop me off, then drive itself back to my house.


    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From BTR1701@atropos@mac.com to rec.arts.tv on Wed Jul 8 02:54:30 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

    On Jul 7, 2026 at 7:33:18 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 7/7/2026 5:32 PM, Your Name wrote:
    On 2026-07-07 17:49:34 +0000, The True Melissa said:
    Verily, in article <234q4l5s8covinc3s9787qeslap4qrjoga@4ax.com>, did
    nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com deliver unto us this message:

    That seems to be a normal thing now thanks to cell phones. Hell, just >>>> look at the people walking around the streets glued to their phones. >>>> Not a clue as to what is going on around them. No surprise they take >>>> that same behavior into their cars.

    Just yesterday, I saw a commercial pushing a car with an autodetect
    system. The idiot driver was looking at her phone when someone stepped >>> into a crosswalk, and the car's system... didn't blow the crosswalk.
    There's a closeup of the woman who didn't quite die.

    In essence, this commercial is telling me that their system will make
    it safe for me to screw around when I'm supposed to be piloting the
    vehicle. I find that appalling.

    Which is exactly what many Tesla drivers do, thanks to Elon Muskrat
    promoting his idiotic nonsense as "full self-driving" even though it is
    not and the car's instructions (and most country's laws) specifically
    state that the driver must still be paying full attention and be ready
    to take over instantly. The number of YouTube videos and similar that
    show these useless cars doing something stupid when driving themselves
    is astounding. It also doesn't help that most of these silly systems do
    not actually work properly either. Yet another reason why "self-driving" >> cars should NOT be allowed on public roads.

    Here's Google's AI (quoting the NYTimes):

    "Self-driving cars are statistically safer than human drivers. Real-world data shows fully autonomous fleets, like Waymo, have up to
    92% fewer pedestrian injury crashes, 85% fewer injury-involving crashes,
    and a significantly lower rate of serious-injury collisions compared to humans driving on the same roads."

    Do they keep stats on how many people are robbed and beaten in them in our social utopias known as blue cities, because the thugs have learned they can immobilize a Waymo by having one guy step in front of it while the others rob the occupants, who are suddenly trapped with nowhere to go?


    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Your Name@YourName@YourISP.com to rec.arts.tv on Wed Jul 8 17:53:24 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

    On 2026-07-08 02:33:18 +0000, moviePig said:
    On 7/7/2026 5:32 PM, Your Name wrote:
    On 2026-07-07 17:49:34 +0000, The True Melissa said:
    Verily, in article <234q4l5s8covinc3s9787qeslap4qrjoga@4ax.com>, did
    nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com deliver unto us this message:

    That seems to be a normal thing now thanks to cell phones. Hell, just >>>> look at the people walking around the streets glued to their phones.
    Not a clue as to what is going on around them. No surprise they take
    that same behavior into their cars.

    Just yesterday, I saw a commercial pushing a car with an autodetect
    system. The idiot driver was looking at her phone when someone stepped
    into a crosswalk, and the car's system... didn't blow the crosswalk.
    There's a closeup of the woman who didn't quite die.

    In essence, this commercial is telling me that their system will make
    it safe for me to screw around when I'm supposed to be piloting the
    vehicle. I find that appalling.

    Which is exactly what many Tesla drivers do, thanks to Elon Muskrat
    promoting his idiotic nonsense as "full self-driving" even though it is
    not and the car's instructions (and most country's laws) specifically
    state that the driver must still be paying full attention and be ready
    to take over instantly. The number of YouTube videos and similar that
    show these useless cars doing something stupid when driving themselves
    is astounding. It also doesn't help that most of these silly systems do
    not actually work properly either. Yet another reason why
    "self-driving" cars should NOT be allowed on public roads.

    Here's Google's AI (quoting the NYTimes):

    "Self-driving cars are statistically safer than human drivers. Real-world data shows fully autonomous fleets, like Waymo, have up to
    92% fewer pedestrian injury crashes, 85% fewer injury-involving
    crashes, and a significantly lower rate of serious-injury collisions compared to humans driving on the same roads."

    Skewed statistics. Self-driving cars have fewer accidents because:

    a. There are far fewer of them on the roads than normal vehicles.

    b. Many of the accidents are not reported and/or hushed up by the company
    the operates the self-driving cars.
    (Tesla has paid off complaints simply to avoid going to court.)



    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From moviePig@nobody@nowhere.com to rec.arts.tv on Wed Jul 8 10:44:35 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

    On 7/8/2026 1:53 AM, Your Name wrote:
    On 2026-07-08 02:33:18 +0000, moviePig said:
    On 7/7/2026 5:32 PM, Your Name wrote:
    On 2026-07-07 17:49:34 +0000, The True Melissa said:
    Verily, in article <234q4l5s8covinc3s9787qeslap4qrjoga@4ax.com>, did
    nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com deliver unto us this message:

    That seems to be a normal thing now thanks to cell phones. Hell,
    just look at the people walking around the streets glued to their
    phones. Not a clue as to what is going on around them. No surprise
    they take that same behavior into their cars.

    Just yesterday, I saw a commercial pushing a car with an autodetect
    system. The idiot driver was looking at her phone when someone
    stepped into a crosswalk, and the car's system... didn't blow the
    crosswalk. There's a closeup of the woman who didn't quite die.

    In essence, this commercial is telling me that their system will
    make it safe for me to screw around when I'm supposed to be piloting
    the vehicle. I find that appalling.

    Which is exactly what many Tesla drivers do, thanks to Elon Muskrat
    promoting his idiotic nonsense as "full self-driving" even though it
    is not and the car's instructions (and most country's laws)
    specifically state that the driver must still be paying full
    attention and be ready to take over instantly. The number of YouTube
    videos and similar that show these useless cars doing something
    stupid when driving themselves is astounding. It also doesn't help
    that most of these silly systems do not actually work properly
    either. Yet another reason why "self-driving" cars should NOT be
    allowed on public roads.

    Here's Google's AI (quoting the NYTimes):

        "Self-driving cars are statistically safer than human drivers.
    Real-world data shows fully autonomous fleets, like Waymo, have up to
    92% fewer pedestrian injury crashes, 85% fewer injury-involving
    crashes, and a significantly lower rate of serious-injury collisions
    compared to humans driving on the same roads."

    Skewed statistics. Self-driving cars have fewer accidents because:

    a. There are far fewer of them on the roads than normal vehicles.

    b. Many of the accidents are not reported and/or hushed up by the company
      the operates the self-driving cars.
      (Tesla has paid off complaints simply to avoid going to court.)

    I'd assume (though you never know) that #1 is adjusted for.

    And, while #2 is undoubtedly in play, I'd be surprised if it accounts
    for the large advantage. I'd sooner suspect outright lying...


    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From moviePig@nobody@nowhere.com to rec.arts.tv on Wed Jul 8 10:48:31 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

    On 7/7/2026 10:54 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
    On Jul 7, 2026 at 7:33:18 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 7/7/2026 5:32 PM, Your Name wrote:
    On 2026-07-07 17:49:34 +0000, The True Melissa said:
    Verily, in article <234q4l5s8covinc3s9787qeslap4qrjoga@4ax.com>, did >>>> nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com deliver unto us this message:

    That seems to be a normal thing now thanks to cell phones. Hell, just >>>>> look at the people walking around the streets glued to their phones. >>>>> Not a clue as to what is going on around them. No surprise they take >>>>> that same behavior into their cars.

    Just yesterday, I saw a commercial pushing a car with an autodetect
    system. The idiot driver was looking at her phone when someone stepped >>>> into a crosswalk, and the car's system... didn't blow the crosswalk. >>>> There's a closeup of the woman who didn't quite die.

    In essence, this commercial is telling me that their system will make >>>> it safe for me to screw around when I'm supposed to be piloting the
    vehicle. I find that appalling.

    Which is exactly what many Tesla drivers do, thanks to Elon Muskrat
    promoting his idiotic nonsense as "full self-driving" even though it is >>> not and the car's instructions (and most country's laws) specifically
    state that the driver must still be paying full attention and be ready >>> to take over instantly. The number of YouTube videos and similar that
    show these useless cars doing something stupid when driving themselves >>> is astounding. It also doesn't help that most of these silly systems do >>> not actually work properly either. Yet another reason why "self-driving" >>> cars should NOT be allowed on public roads.

    Here's Google's AI (quoting the NYTimes):

    "Self-driving cars are statistically safer than human drivers.
    Real-world data shows fully autonomous fleets, like Waymo, have up to
    92% fewer pedestrian injury crashes, 85% fewer injury-involving crashes,
    and a significantly lower rate of serious-injury collisions compared to
    humans driving on the same roads."

    Do they keep stats on how many people are robbed and beaten in them in our social utopias known as blue cities, because the thugs have learned they can immobilize a Waymo by having one guy step in front of it while the others rob the occupants, who are suddenly trapped with nowhere to go?

    The actual stats on that are likely irrelevant to headline-writers.


    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From BTR1701@atropos@mac.com to rec.arts.tv on Wed Jul 8 18:04:37 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

    On Jul 8, 2026 at 7:48:31 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 7/7/2026 10:54 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
    On Jul 7, 2026 at 7:33:18 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 7/7/2026 5:32 PM, Your Name wrote:
    On 2026-07-07 17:49:34 +0000, The True Melissa said:
    Verily, in article <234q4l5s8covinc3s9787qeslap4qrjoga@4ax.com>, did >>>>> nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com deliver unto us this message:

    That seems to be a normal thing now thanks to cell phones. Hell, just >>>>>> look at the people walking around the streets glued to their phones. >>>>>> Not a clue as to what is going on around them. No surprise they take >>>>>> that same behavior into their cars.

    Just yesterday, I saw a commercial pushing a car with an autodetect >>>>> system. The idiot driver was looking at her phone when someone stepped >>>>> into a crosswalk, and the car's system... didn't blow the crosswalk. >>>>> There's a closeup of the woman who didn't quite die.

    In essence, this commercial is telling me that their system will make >>>>> it safe for me to screw around when I'm supposed to be piloting the >>>>> vehicle. I find that appalling.

    Which is exactly what many Tesla drivers do, thanks to Elon Muskrat >>>> promoting his idiotic nonsense as "full self-driving" even though it is >>>> not and the car's instructions (and most country's laws) specifically >>>> state that the driver must still be paying full attention and be ready >>>> to take over instantly. The number of YouTube videos and similar that >>>> show these useless cars doing something stupid when driving themselves >>>> is astounding. It also doesn't help that most of these silly systems do >>>> not actually work properly either. Yet another reason why "self-driving"
    cars should NOT be allowed on public roads.

    Here's Google's AI (quoting the NYTimes):

    "Self-driving cars are statistically safer than human drivers.
    Real-world data shows fully autonomous fleets, like Waymo, have up to
    92% fewer pedestrian injury crashes, 85% fewer injury-involving crashes, >>> and a significantly lower rate of serious-injury collisions compared to >>> humans driving on the same roads."

    Do they keep stats on how many people are robbed and beaten in them in our >> social utopias known as blue cities, because the thugs have learned they can
    immobilize a Waymo by having one guy step in front of it while the others >> rob
    the occupants, who are suddenly trapped with nowhere to go?

    The actual stats on that are likely irrelevant to headline-writers.

    Or media orgs with an agenda to maintain, especially considering most of the miscreants are diverse.


    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From moviePig@nobody@nowhere.com to rec.arts.tv on Wed Jul 8 16:00:14 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

    On 7/8/2026 2:04 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
    On Jul 8, 2026 at 7:48:31 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 7/7/2026 10:54 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
    On Jul 7, 2026 at 7:33:18 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>
    On 7/7/2026 5:32 PM, Your Name wrote:
    On 2026-07-07 17:49:34 +0000, The True Melissa said:
    Verily, in article <234q4l5s8covinc3s9787qeslap4qrjoga@4ax.com>, did >>>>>> nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com deliver unto us this message:

    That seems to be a normal thing now thanks to cell phones. Hell, just
    look at the people walking around the streets glued to their phones.
    Not a clue as to what is going on around them. No surprise they take
    that same behavior into their cars.

    Just yesterday, I saw a commercial pushing a car with an autodetect >>>>>> system. The idiot driver was looking at her phone when someone stepped
    into a crosswalk, and the car's system... didn't blow the crosswalk. >>>>>> There's a closeup of the woman who didn't quite die.

    In essence, this commercial is telling me that their system will make
    it safe for me to screw around when I'm supposed to be piloting the >>>>>> vehicle. I find that appalling.

    Which is exactly what many Tesla drivers do, thanks to Elon Muskrat >>>>> promoting his idiotic nonsense as "full self-driving" even though it is
    not and the car's instructions (and most country's laws) specifically >>>>> state that the driver must still be paying full attention and be ready
    to take over instantly. The number of YouTube videos and similar that >>>>> show these useless cars doing something stupid when driving themselves
    is astounding. It also doesn't help that most of these silly systems do
    not actually work properly either. Yet another reason why "self-driving"
    cars should NOT be allowed on public roads.

    Here's Google's AI (quoting the NYTimes):

    "Self-driving cars are statistically safer than human drivers.
    Real-world data shows fully autonomous fleets, like Waymo, have up to >>>> 92% fewer pedestrian injury crashes, 85% fewer injury-involving crashes, >>>> and a significantly lower rate of serious-injury collisions compared to >>>> humans driving on the same roads."

    Do they keep stats on how many people are robbed and beaten in them in our
    social utopias known as blue cities, because the thugs have learned they can
    immobilize a Waymo by having one guy step in front of it while the others >>> rob
    the occupants, who are suddenly trapped with nowhere to go?

    The actual stats on that are likely irrelevant to headline-writers.

    Or media orgs with an agenda to maintain, especially considering most of the miscreants are diverse.

    They are? Are there actual stats on that?


    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Your Name@YourName@YourISP.com to rec.arts.tv on Thu Jul 9 10:30:58 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

    On 2026-07-08 14:44:35 +0000, moviePig said:
    On 7/8/2026 1:53 AM, Your Name wrote:
    On 2026-07-08 02:33:18 +0000, moviePig said:
    On 7/7/2026 5:32 PM, Your Name wrote:
    On 2026-07-07 17:49:34 +0000, The True Melissa said:
    Verily, in article <234q4l5s8covinc3s9787qeslap4qrjoga@4ax.com>, did >>>>> nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com deliver unto us this message:

    That seems to be a normal thing now thanks to cell phones. Hell, just >>>>>> look at the people walking around the streets glued to their phones. >>>>>> Not a clue as to what is going on around them. No surprise they take >>>>>> that same behavior into their cars.

    Just yesterday, I saw a commercial pushing a car with an autodetect >>>>> system. The idiot driver was looking at her phone when someone stepped >>>>> into a crosswalk, and the car's system... didn't blow the crosswalk. >>>>> There's a closeup of the woman who didn't quite die.

    In essence, this commercial is telling me that their system will make >>>>> it safe for me to screw around when I'm supposed to be piloting the >>>>> vehicle. I find that appalling.

    Which is exactly what many Tesla drivers do, thanks to Elon Muskrat
    promoting his idiotic nonsense as "full self-driving" even though it is >>>> not and the car's instructions (and most country's laws) specifically >>>> state that the driver must still be paying full attention and be ready >>>> to take over instantly. The number of YouTube videos and similar that >>>> show these useless cars doing something stupid when driving themselves >>>> is astounding. It also doesn't help that most of these silly systems do >>>> not actually work properly either. Yet another reason why
    "self-driving" cars should NOT be allowed on public roads.

    Here's Google's AI (quoting the NYTimes):

        "Self-driving cars are statistically safer than human drivers.
    Real-world data shows fully autonomous fleets, like Waymo, have up to
    92% fewer pedestrian injury crashes, 85% fewer injury-involving
    crashes, and a significantly lower rate of serious-injury collisions
    compared to humans driving on the same roads."

    Skewed statistics. Self-driving cars have fewer accidents because:

    a. There are far fewer of them on the roads than normal vehicles.

    b. Many of the accidents are not reported and/or hushed up by the company
      the operates the self-driving cars.
      (Tesla has paid off complaints simply to avoid going to court.)

    I'd assume (though you never know) that #1 is adjusted for.

    Never assume anything, especially with statistics. Statistical
    manipulation (as well as bad survey methodology) is used to "prove"
    whatever the person paying for it wants it to prove.

    Such statistics are also created by taking the actual facts from tiny
    sample size, and tehn just multiplying it bigger ... it's no better
    than guesswork and bares little resemblence to actual reality, let
    alone fact. The percentage symbol is purposely used to trick the unwary.



    And, while #2 is undoubtedly in play, I'd be surprised if it accounts
    for the large advantage. I'd sooner suspect outright lying...


    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Your Name@YourName@YourISP.com to rec.arts.tv on Thu Jul 9 10:33:26 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

    On 2026-07-08 14:48:31 +0000, moviePig said:
    On 7/7/2026 10:54 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
    On Jul 7, 2026 at 7:33:18 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
    On 7/7/2026 5:32 PM, Your Name wrote:
    On 2026-07-07 17:49:34 +0000, The True Melissa said:
    Verily, in article <234q4l5s8covinc3s9787qeslap4qrjoga@4ax.com>, did >>>>> nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com deliver unto us this message:

    That seems to be a normal thing now thanks to cell phones. Hell, just >>>>>> look at the people walking around the streets glued to their phones. >>>>>> Not a clue as to what is going on around them. No surprise they take >>>>>> that same behavior into their cars.

    Just yesterday, I saw a commercial pushing a car with an autodetect
    system. The idiot driver was looking at her phone when someone stepped >>>>> into a crosswalk, and the car's system... didn't blow the crosswalk. >>>>> There's a closeup of the woman who didn't quite die.

    In essence, this commercial is telling me that their system will make >>>>> it safe for me to screw around when I'm supposed to be piloting the
    vehicle. I find that appalling.

    Which is exactly what many Tesla drivers do, thanks to Elon Muskrat
    promoting his idiotic nonsense as "full self-driving" even though it is >>>> not and the car's instructions (and most country's laws) specifically
    state that the driver must still be paying full attention and be ready >>>> to take over instantly. The number of YouTube videos and similar that
    show these useless cars doing something stupid when driving themselves >>>> is astounding. It also doesn't help that most of these silly systems do >>>> not actually work properly either. Yet another reason why "self-driving" >>>> cars should NOT be allowed on public roads.

    Here's Google's AI (quoting the NYTimes):

    "Self-driving cars are statistically safer than human drivers.
    Real-world data shows fully autonomous fleets, like Waymo, have up to
    92% fewer pedestrian injury crashes, 85% fewer injury-involving crashes, >>> and a significantly lower rate of serious-injury collisions compared to
    humans driving on the same roads."

    Do they keep stats on how many people are robbed and beaten in them in our >> social utopias known as blue cities, because the thugs have learned they can >> immobilize a Waymo by having one guy step in front of it while the others rob
    the occupants, who are suddenly trapped with nowhere to go?

    The actual stats on that are likely irrelevant to headline-writers.

    The actual *FACTS* are always irrelevant to the headline writers ...
    even whn you read the story underneath, you often find the headline is
    either misleading or plain wrong, or even has nothing to do with the
    article at all!


    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2