I beg to differ that driving isn”t a mundane job. I find no joy in driving short or long distances and welcomed the convenience of car driving services like Uber that democratized the taxi services, introduced competition, and lowered the cost of on demand car services. Now that companies like Uber and Lyft have a near monopoly, it’s only natural that they be disrupted by cheaper autonomous services. Disrupting this continued innovation would stagnate the American economy. Let capitalist place their bets and enjoy the gains and the public enjoy the spoils of their bets. If there is no demand for these services then the capital will be deployed elsewhere.
Yes. The infancy of innovations are often rudimentary, works in progress and do displace people from mundane jobs and often frees up that labor to fill other roles in the economy. I”m sure you wouldn’t want women manually routing your phone calls on switchboards today. ( and with respect to English speaking - what does that have to do with getting from Point A to Point B using GPS coordinates? The language barrier isn’t an issue in the USA or traveling around the world now - your pain point here seems to indicate a robotaxi service that literally knows all the rules of the road, is more attentive than a human driver, and can communicate in whatever language the rider prefers would more than meet your needs. )
How does an autonomous taxi service conflict with your principles and dignity? It”s just the next wave of innovation.
How do you propose we pay for joint resources? Should they be payed via tolls (ie. roads, street lights, sewage system, electrical grid)?
They are not mutually exclusive. It’s still plausible many of the claims Ross was convicted for are still true and he was encouraged/entrapped in other crimes.
I don’t see part 3/3 of your thread. However, just thinking what’s unreasonable about this exercise? Presenting evidence for and against theories like, the moon landing was faked or the flat earth theory seems reasonable. At some point we need to be able to rationally come to some conclusions based on the presented evidence.
I’m all for challenging conventional wisdom, but a necessary element should be to provide evidence for the opposing position. What’s the foundation for why you beleive mRNA vaccines are related to a perceived increase in cardiac arrests?
I had something similar happen in Texas. When the county reassesses the value of the property the taxes will increase accordingly. Some states cap the annual rate of increase so you don’t experience huge increases.
Please elaborate. Are you referring to the business model or the profession? Examples?
How is this policy any different from what has occurred on ActivityPub or similar services?
how do you reconcile Christianity’s centralized monotheism and restricted freedoms with evangelizing unfettered systems like bitcoin and nostr?