How is this relevant?
If it is relevant it’s a strong premise to add to the argument to why we need to strip people of their licenses, but that’s not germaine to the conversion.
Radical empathy is both radical and empathetic.
How is this relevant?
If it is relevant it’s a strong premise to add to the argument to why we need to strip people of their licenses, but that’s not germaine to the conversion.
I swear you are implying you have never seen a human get stuck navigating a car for what would seem to be mundane or pointless reasons…
Are you okay?
There is no cow level
You forgot to hide your name.


Not OP but I’ll try to hop in.
How do you deal with non-empirical questions?
While religion isn’t the only solution science definitely won’t help and logic can only tell you if structure of thought is true but not its premise content.
So, your are left with 3 options:


Is this loss?
Didn’t the hotel lady have one of these in Hot Fuzz?
Logic.

The best part of this response is, “you know nothing of me, but I who also know nothing of you can judge you.”
???
You are lucky enough to be in a position to prepare for and seize opportunities. Your take on luck seems to be driven by Survivorship Bias.
It is possible I misread, long day at work.


Are native American lands not states within states?


I’ll bite.
As a math teacher I agree. Phrasing the question with “money” is ambiguous.
That’s why the important part was showing your work which the student failed to do. Depending on school policy this may be a no-credit or at most half credit answer.
The major flaw with math education is reading and writing. Very little of elementary school is spent reading, writing, and discussing. This problem is fantastic, it forces students to read, write and analyze. Especially since it’s ambiguous.
If a student at that age said “Amy has more coins” and answered Amy prior I would take it.
Alternatively they could go for the formal answer of “Bobby has 4 dimes. A dime is worth 10 pennies. Bobby has 40 pennies worth.”
We forget that math is about reasoning and justification, not just calculation.


I love the digital library idea. Sadly, given the state of the US we would see folks on the street going
“The govs online libraries make kids want to be trans” or something like that.


Probably the classics.
Laws enforcing how public transit is provided. They literally kept a station open for a single high school student.
Public health is top notch, it goes above and beyond for patients, be they citizens or not.
While suicide is high in Japan, it’s considered a public policy and social failure than a personal one so the government dumps money into improving suicide help.
Waste sorting and just general cleanliness.


Fair. As a halfbreed myself I can say it’s awful if you are not Japanese.
They do have some really kickass laws though.
I am not anti human or pro billionaire. Your inferences about me are unfounded. I am calling you out for a lack of functional argument. Your statement “Waymo cannot navigate cities” loads the idea that because there Waymo lacks a human there is no variance in decision making.
Let’s concede, for sake of argument, all Waymo make the same decision every time without fail.
Let’s further suppose a group of persons learned to drive and were told you cannot pull out into the intersection for a left turn. Now you have a group of people who clearly will make the same decision and hold up traffic.
If there is no one to inform them and in some sense reprogram this, then they will continue to do this ad nauseum.
Thus, there is no functional difference beyond your pre-loaded bias about Waymo cars and improperly trained human drivers.