I’m surprisingly level-headed for being a walking knot of anxiety.
Ask me anything.
I also develop Tesseract UI for Lemmy/Sublinks
Avatar by @SatyrSack@feddit.org
That’s what I thought (re: backup cameras), and someone else mentioned the gauge cluster is a digital screen which switches to the backup camera view). In my case, 150 miles (round trip ) would be just around the upper edge of my use cases, though 15-20 would be more average.
which these days are basically a full size truck of yester-yore
Makes me miss my old 2003 Ranger. It was right where I needed a truck to be, size-wise.
Would definitely buy one of these. I miss having a truck, but I only need one occasionally for the occasional need to haul something that won’t fit in my car (e.g. Lowe’s trips). I also really dislike the “smartphone on wheels” aspect of pretty much all current EVs.
Plus, I hate the infotainment systems so I would be happy to roll my own.
Though I do wonder if it has a backup camera/screen. Aren’t those required nowadays?
I don’t see what people’s problem with this is. It’s not like it’s anyone can just buy a blue check (unlike X). It’s just confirming that the account belongs to who it claims to be (like old Twitter verified users). I don’t know if that requires any payment, but it’s definitely not “Here’s $5 – okay, here’s your blue check”.
- During this initial phase, Bluesky is not accepting direct applications for verification," the company said.
- “As this feature stabilizes, we’ll launch a request form for notable and authentic accounts interested in becoming verified or becoming trusted verifiers.”
If I remember correctly, that’s pretty much exactly how old Twitter rolled out its original user verification.
From a de-centralized perspective, I’m not sure how that would work. I guess each instance would be in charge of verification and setting the “verified” flag for the account? The alternative would be some kind of central authority. Granted, I know little of Bluesky (microblogging is not my cup of tea), so I may be way off on my guesses there.
It sounds like you’re describing the Paradox of Tolerance.
The paradox of tolerance states that if a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant is eventually ceased or destroyed by the intolerant. Karl Popper described it as the seemingly self-contradictory idea that in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must retain the right to be intolerant of intolerance.
I don’t really have a good answer other than follow your heart, I guess.
Yeah, true. Forgot about that one. Also, they knew about climate change for over 40 years and still spent millions of dollars promoting denialism and misinformation in the name of profits.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/exxon-knew-about-climate-change-almost-40-years-ago/
At this point, what am I not boycotting? lol
I guess this is the abridged no-go list:
Late additions:
Good to know. Will have to read up, though from the little I’ve read, it sounds like this is just a concept for now.