This is the image, taken directly from your mirror adjustment video. The red triangles (added by me) show the “blind spots” you have when using just your mirrors, as adjusted in this video. If you fail to check these blind spots before making a driving maneuver, you could easily kill someone. You have to turn your head to check these spaces. The act of turning your head is the literal definition of checking a blind spot.

Feel free to back out of this discussion, but be sure to check your surroundings before going in reverse.

We’re saying “you need to check your blind spot when driving” and you’re saying “blind spots don’t exist, but also you can almost completely eliminate blind spots by mirror position, but also I still check blind spots”.

The disconnect is that you’ve arbitrarily defined “blind spot” incorrectly, and refuse to acknowledge that “the bit of road not shown in rear view mirrors that is only visible by physically turning your head” is a blind spot. No amount of mirror adjusting is going to be able to fully replace checking a blind spot. Even using the method of the video you linked, seeing cars 2 lanes over merging in is basically impossible.

Blind spots are real. Mirrors, by definition, can’t show you everything in your blind spot. If you don’t check your blind spots, you could be responsible for someone’s death.

I’m guessing they call it something different where you live, but in America “blind spot” refers to the area you can’t see in your mirrors, and must turn your head to see. It’s literally what you describe as you talk about a car passing in your second paragraph. “Checking your blind spot” refers to the process of physically turning your head to check and making sure the lane change/turn is safe to do.

The reason he painted you as an invincible road warrior bent on killing pedestrians is because you denied the existence of one of the biggest causes of car-on-non-car incidents: failure to check blind spots. Which, prior to this comment, you definitely sounded like, and I think you’ll agree if you reread your comment with the new context of what Americans call “blind spots”.

I mean, Descartes had brain in a vat theories well before the 1980s, and Plato’s allegory of the cave is fundamentally the same. My position was that “the reason we’re talking about it again all of a sudden is because one idiot got on the podcast of another idiot and poorly explained it to the throngs of their uncritical fans”.

Musk said it in Rogan a few weeks ago, and it became a justified belief overnight. It had huge flaws in logic when he said it, and no one who is parroting the talking point today is thinking beyond “the real life Ironman says we live in the matrix”.

An ex and I used to jokingly sing “avocados from Mexico” because that was an advertising jingle, and she definitely ate avocado toast all the time. We broke up in 2013, so it had to be kinda popular before then.

STARK: “wow, your intellect is stunning. I look forward to seeing what you’ll be able to accomplish in the next few years”

CAMERA PANS

GRETA THUNBERG SMILES

The number of times I shout “your car is supposed to be smarter than that!” As a Tesla does something like, without signaling, whips around me and into oncoming traffic to pass a stopped city bus is staggering.

A coworker of mine was recently bragging about their new electric mustang and its zero to sixty time. “Have you ever gone zero to sixty?” was my only response. Of all the facts and figures, 0-60 has you to be one of the least important when buying a car.

Am I insane? I’ve been seeing avocado toast on menus for years. Granted, I was living in California at the time, but still. I feel like Dunkin donuts introduced avocado toast to their menu like three years ago.

I’m not really a “brunch” guy, but I feel like every breakfast spot I’ve been to since 2015 has done avocado toast.

Competition is the answer, though. The problem is companies ended up competing the wrong way. If I could watch “The Office” on any streaming platform, suddenly they’re all in competition to create a better platform (quicker loads, different pricing models, integration with different devices, etc). By limiting shows to only certain platforms, sure, you’re creating an easy way to differentiate between platforms, but you’re letting the competition stagnate as you just create cable TV with extra steps: minimal choice, minimal ease of use, minimal cost upside.

I was having this same conversation the other day. Have you ever seen that picture where different people involved in the creation of the video game Kirby draw the title character? Two look really good, and the rest are awkward blobs that only look like Kirby because of the power of suggestion.

Anyway, I genuinely think a team of Tesla employees (independent of Musk) were talking about building a truck, and all took turns drawing something while pulling together numbers before the pitch to Musk. As a joke, the design team mocked up the worst sketch in 3D, and Musk accidentally saw the design in the Slack chat history and demanded it.

Either that, or some sort of “have your kid draw the next Tesla” employee contest, and the design teams modeled the funniest ones as actual cars for the company newsletter. Like those companies that’ll turn your kid’s drawings into real life stuffed toys.

tried not being a grumpy godless commie?

You know you’re in Lemmy, right?

If we’re adding somewhat related concepts OP might find interesting, I’ve always thought these were neat: grammatically correct sentences your brain doesn’t process the first time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garden-path_sentence

For a service like Twitter, where user numbers define value, using it is 100% supporting it. Again, the metaphor falls apart because suggesting they can’t use other options suggests they might die, which is painfully untrue for the vast majority of Twitter users (literally no user in a developed country relies on Twitter for life/death information in a way other sources can’t provide).

Oh, shit, well as long as they got to the restaurant before the Nazi bought it, I guess there’s no harm in continuing to support it. Especially if they don’t have the technical knowledge to… Stop using a website?

This metaphor falls down when you realize the table is in a restaurant owned by a Nazi, and the table by the window makes the restaurant look really popular.

Refusing to concede the table is literally adding value to the Nazi owned table, and giving others cover to say “no we also hate Nazis; we’re just here because that table looks cool” which furthers the problem.

I wonder who makes the mainframes used at NSA domestic spying server farms, or who run the computing for predator drone targeting systems. “Not profitable to be vocal in support of antisemitism” hardly means “currently on the moral high ground”…

High fees, inconsistent/false advertising, burdensome chores? When was this article written, 2017? This has been the state of Airbnb for half its lifetime. There was a year, maybe two, at the very beginning where it truly was “crashing at your friend’s place”, in the same way Uber was “getting a ride from a friend”. Both have become full time corporate institutions with wage slaves pushing a product that’s somehow worse than the original problem (generally due to the lack of regulations around these “gig economy” alternatives), at the detriment of communities and others who attempted to make a living “playing by the rules”.

At this point, if you’re using Airbnb, not only are you impossibly ignorant of the problem, you’re actively contributing to it.

Clearly the solution is 3D print drawer slides and a little handle so they can effortlessly slide out of the cabinet. Maybe even a pivot so they can angle down and lock in place for easy perusal and selection.