Tinidril

Journalists, with or without quotes, don't generally get to write headlines. Editors write those.

Point? And who is telling anyone to "BeEeE aFrAiD!!". Vaccination is incredibly effective for measles, so most people have nothing to worry about personally. Still, who wants to see kids get an unnecessary disease that hospitalizes 1/4 and kills 1/1000?

This isn't fear, it's just disgust at having one more reason to despise far right morons. These are the same people who will wring their hands and cry "think of the children" for every damn oppressive piece of bullshit legislation they want to pass.

It’s not holding society together; it’s bleeding it dry

That's what the oligarch's think. It won't be the first time the powerful have ignorantly destroyed themselves.

You think people depend on this machine?

Absolutely. It's in the math. A middle age existence could never support the number of people alive today. If Americans had to grow their own food, most would fail spectacularly. We depend profoundly on specialization and trade. We can't live as islands in this modern world.

And hunting? Spare me the tough-guy act.

There is nothing tough about hunting, and it's just what will be. You are ignorant trash who doesn't care who your ranting destroys.

The machine seems to be breaking just fine but, on behalf of the people who depend on that machine (pretty much everyone in the US and a whole lot of people outside the US) if you want the machine broken then you are my mortal enemy.

Accelerationism is insanity. Even when you get past "some of you may die, but that's a sacrifice I'm willing to make" collapsing societies rarely lead to something better. It's almost always the worst people that manage to win the resulting power struggle because, like you, they don't give a shit who dies in the process.

The most likely scenario if (when?) the machine breaks is that we look a lot like Russia does today. I know plenty of people like you and, on that day, I start hunting.

Some maybe, but the sloppiness makes me think they are the result. People obviously fall for this shit or we wouldn't have Elon for President.

The libertarian movement was originally left wing and was co-opted by anarcho-capitalists. The original meaning was very anti-authoritarian, but not the one adopted by the Libertarian party. Real libertarians see one of the government's primary purposes is populist opposition to financial dominance by oligarchs. Libertarians see any government action as definitionally oppressive and blindly pays homage to oligarchs and the "free market".

It's "Libertarian" not "libertarian". The Libertarian party stole the name and applied it to anarcho-capitalist fascism which is the exact opposite of libertarianism. As a real libertarian, the double-speak really gets under my skin.

But yes, hacker culture was a prime target of the deceptive brand confusion and it worked perfectly. Corporations have gone from being cyberpunk villains to heros fighting "government overreach".

Ugh, some of the comments under the article are painfully dumb.

It never seems to work out that way anymore. The bad guys outlive us all.

This is frankly impossible to do in the modern workspace. Access to everything needed to do the work can be switched off almost instantly. Also, good luck getting financial institutions to comply or even meet with you when they know you're going rogue and don't have the force of government behind you.

Just talking from my own experience with these two vehicles, they will continue creeping along until I feel the physical brake engage.

It makes a certain amount of sense that a car that isn't moving can't generate power by stopping, and no regeneration means no regenerative braking. Were the car completely stopped it would have to start moving a little to get braking power, and imperfect efficiency would mean it's never going to be enough to stop the vehicle completely.

I know what you're talking about with smaller electric vehicles, but I think that locking operates on different principles. I don't think many of those have regenerative braking because the math doesn't make it practical at that scale. I definitely don't put myself forward as an expert though.

as with any war, there's never a solution that's going to please everyone.

I hear Hitler was particularly displeased with the way WWII ended. Pleasing everyone ain't the goal here Skippy.

Ending the war, by itself, is a good thing.

If either side thought that, there wouldn't be a war. Obviously there are "bad things" associated with ending the war that are considered worse than continuing it.

Do you think that if the Ukraine military and government surrendered completely today that it would mean peace? Not a chance. Russia would be oppressive and an uprising would begin the moment formal hostilities ended - as would be right and proper.

Russia does not have the manpower - in training or just raw numbers - to effectively occupy and quell rebellion in Ukraine. The result would be a bloody quagmire for at least a decade, and it would arguably be worse than the current formal hostilities.