I don’t know what that graph is using as small, but the Fiat 500e has been sold here for quite some time. There is an electric Mini, an electric Focus, and the Bolt EUV is pretty small. SUV is sort of meaningless to define size alone when it encompasses things from the Bolt EUV and Model Y to a Cadillac Lyriq. Smaller ones usually classified as crossovers/CUVs.

Where I was going was: effects can be different even if all choices and results are unethical. If one cares about the possible impacts of ones actions, consideration beyond “well it’s all unethical, so whatever” could be warranted.

are all unethical choices equal? Surely there are better and worse things?

Just criticises? Not “slams”, “destroys”, or eviscerates? Weak. No rage click from me.

Antivax crowd no longer drinking milk I guess

it’s a [not obvious I suppose] joke

Breaking news from the astronomy community!..

no, no, I’m certain I’ve seen this dish before. That’s ratatouille!

seriously, though. That looks good.

I don’t think you can reply to a text message using a third party watch on iOS but you can with your Apple watch. I’ve seen that cited as an exclusive API.

Something is stopping another messaging app to have sms fallback and be the default messaging app on iOS. It’s iOS.

DOJ wants to get in on some of that hot euro DMA action

Do you think the color difference is just to mess with android users or something and is otherwise meaningless? It represents differences in abilities. The abilities are the “degraded” part.

The meta bit is that specifically here, it’s sort of a derail of the main topic. Some downvotes I’m sure are for that. As for why this essay might generally attract downvotes? I’ll follow your locomotive off the track.

I mean, 1. It’s a frickin’ essay. 2. Comes off as a little cold and sorta “I know better than you do”, and 3. seems to completely miss the point of what I interpret as most folks dislike of AI in the current incarnations we are seeing (which isn’t a real sci-fi type general AI that gets society to the end point of your essay). I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone worrying about “what will I do to find purpose in a fully-automated-gay-space-luxury-communism?” (overemphasis mine of course). It’s now and the next so many years, not some far off future that (I interpret) folks seem to be worrying about. It’s income stability now, careers to go into now, disinformation now, degradation of the internet and media now. I think the zeitgeist here is that it’s going to get a lot worse before it gets any better. I don’t think anyone on Lemmy really has high hopes for major players in current economic systems to use AI-as-it-exists-now to make anything better of the world in aggregate. It ain’t the tools, it’s those who wield them.

Not bad, Jupiter. Considering you have 120x the surface area of earth, that’s a lot of moons.

Gotta read past the headline folks, it’s at best implying something it isn’t and at worst, rage bait.

You’ve got my head spinning “Government bans smaller government’s decision to restrict smaller government’s own flag speech”

Did you see this is a ban for the City to fly the flag on City property? Sure, shitty, and the reasons behind it are shitty but I don’t see how it’s a first amendment deal.

Wait, you’re telling me my favorite brand doesn’t actually support LGBT stuff? They’re only in it for the money? Whaaa?

“We disagree with the Court’s opinion that employers can require employees to be taught — as a condition of employment — that one race is morally superior to another race. The First Amendment protects no such thing, and the State of Florida should have every right to protect Floridians from racially hostile workplaces. We are reviewing all options on appeal going forward.”

I have an extremely low opinion of intelligence of the “anti-woke” warriors but, like, do people really think that’s what’s happening? They’re honestly thinking DEI stuff is teaching that one race is “morally superior” to another? That’s just a wild fucking line to throw in there.

thanks for the additional information!

Cedrick Frazier is in on it, too. For some reason he rates a picture while Bonnie Westlin doesn’t. Presumably because of the comparisons the article/general press is making with these laws/Floyd and that Frazier is black. Saying anything about him being black in the article would be crass, but they’ll just drop a picture and not have to write anything. “Ooooh look, he must be a hypocrite!” I mean he kinda sorta is maybe, but not because he’s black but because the article says he was a champion of police reform after Floyd’s murder and now is walking back a reform.

The money is supposed to go to training. Seems reasonable enough. They have a “Captain of Investigations Tanya Harmoning” going on in there about how the cops only know how to do things one way. Seems like it could be good if they learned a different way. There is a little more detail, too: “But even without a ban on prone restraints, he said that state law would continue to prohibit school-based officers from pinning students to the ground in ways that restrict breathing.”