gregorum

@gregorum@lemm.ee

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

gregorum, (edited )

I was listening to a breakdown of this study on a New York Times podcast. It has to do with huge cultural differences between how Europeans and Americans interact with smartphones in cars, particularly because most cars in the United States are automatic and most cars in Europe are stick shifts, meaning that it’s very difficult for Europeans to screw around with her phones while they’re driving. Driving a car with a manual transmission requires both hands, meaning drivers, don’t have a free hand to fiddle with their phones.

Another part of the explanation for the difference between the United States and Europe in this regard is that suburban United States cities are designed in the auto age and designed very much around cars with a complete disregard for pedestrian safety, particularly at night. American pedestrians in these cities have to walk much farther and around much larger and more dangerous roads to get to their destinations, while having access to poor or even nonexistent transit networks. 

edit: one other data point they mentioned was the homeless, and while that population was rising in 2009, it sharply began to rise in 2016. these are people who are the most vulnerable in our society already, who often dwell near dangerous roads, highway overpasses, etc., and especially at night. Homeless people account for a significant portion of the increase in pedestrian fatalities in certain regions.

gregorum, (edited )

according to the study, small cars have been responsible for just as many fatalities - or not an amount disproportionate to their number - in the US, so it’s not really big car problem as much as you might suppose. this may have to do with that drivers of small cars can often drive more recklessly, but that’s speculation. And, sure, you can fiddle with your phone with a manual transmission, but, seemingly, most don’t. The difficulty makes it far, far, less likely.

but the biggest takeaways from he study seems to be 1) modern road/highway infrastructure in the US is built to get as many cars moving as fast as possible and give little-to-no consideration to pedestrians or their safety, and this need to change, and 2) the particularly American culture around in-car smartphone use needs to change via far harsher penalties for distracted diving and other behaviors which endanger pedestrians.

gregorum,

while i’m certain that automatic transmissions indeed do exist in Europe, i was simply referring to the fact that they’re far less common there.

but the fact that distracted driving is punished far more severely there, however, DOES have a major impact on how less common that habit is in European driver culture. also, probably, the culture of giving more of a damn about your fellow citiens than your average American does.

gregorum,

That’s the article not the podcast

[Resolved] Debian 12: trying to auto-mount a NTFS-formatted hard drive by making an entry in fstab. Getting the error "mount: /etc/fstab: parse error at line 18 -- ignored"

Here’s the entry in the fstab file for mounting my hard drive. I have bolded the name of the hard drive (that’s what it shows up as on the dock when it isn’t mounted):...

gregorum, (edited )

sometimes there are those times when you’ve been at it for 6-8 hours straight with no break, and you keep staring at that one line in your config, trying so hard to see this mistake. is it a comma out of place? did i missplell something? no? and you’re staring at it so long that you just don’t see the glaringly obvious:


<span style="color:#323232;">***New Volume***
</span>

it’s that one remnant that you probably copy/pasted from a tutorial page and you’re too brain-fried to consider that it’s a part of the line you should have changed, so you’re not looking at it, but there it is. but, hey, that’s why forums like this exist: to get a fresh pair of eyes on the problem.

we’ve all been there.

gregorum,

lmao, ok i see.

in any case, i’m very glad that you got your drive mounted!

gregorum, (edited )

https://lemm.ee/pictrs/image/72726cb0-6c43-4d46-9846-a316c187dae9.webp

edit: ok, i’m sorry that i only noticed the typo 12 hours later. i’ll fix it when i get home, i promise!

gregorum,

🥃

gregorum,

In this Very Special Episode, Wesley experiments with cart-play…

gregorum,

some people are just allergic to fun

gregorum, (edited )

Aww. Her character in that film (Mrs. Banks) was my introduction to the concept of Women’s Suffrage when i was a little child.

She will be missed.

gregorum, (edited )

The only consideration for USB sticks is that they’re usually quite crap, so running a system off it tends to use up the flash pretty quickly.

not to mention that, due to the crap flash, they also tend to be quite slow and unreliable.

gregorum, (edited )

It’s sort of like saying 9/11 was an effective use of terrorism shortly after it happened

here’s the thing, though: by no measure could this statement be considered even remotely true.

what does the following statement have to do with it?

Do you want evidence that people died in the tororist attacks, or that the statement is offensive?

because, at no point, did anyone ask for evidence of nor call into doubt either of those claims.

gregorum, (edited )

It was and still is unclear what you were asking me to prove.

I made myself very clear:

It’s sort of like saying 9/11 was an effective use of terrorism shortly after it happened

here’s the thing, though: by no measure could this statement be considered even remotely true…The argument you propose, conversely, lacks the obvious evidentiary support required to substantiate such… an ambitious arguments yours….come back with evidence to support your claims.

A comparison isn’t a statement of fact, it’s to illustrate how two things are similar.

which you failed to do spectacularly by comparing two things which bear no resemblance in the way you suggest:

It’s sort of like saying 9/11 was an effective use of terrorism

because it wasn’t, for it achieved none of its intended goals. if it is your assertion that it did, it’s your job to prove that, which you have not.

I further explained why I feel that it was fair to compaire them

no you then used this straw man instead:

Do you want evidence that people died in the tororist attacks, or that the statement is offensive?

then you used a series of unrelated equivocations rather than addressing the flaw in your logic: the lack of efficacy of the 9/11 attacks as a tool for social or political change (the entire premise from the start).

If you want to keep picking things apart for the sake of it though, have at it.

you’re not a victim because you made a terrible argument and got called out for it.

is that clear enough for you now?

gregorum,

I never said that 9/11 was a successful use of terrorism

I have quoted you several times saying exactly that.

I said that the statement Data made about the troubles being successful was offensive and would be similar to saying the same thing about other terrorist attacks.

you may have intended to argue that, but you clearly argued:

It’s sort of like saying 9/11 was an effective use of terrorism

and now you keep insisting that:

You then aggressively began demanding evidence for something that was never a statement of fact, making it unclear what you were talking about.

when you very clearly said this:

It’s sort of like saying 9/11 was an effective use of terrorism

and now are acting indignant that I have to keep reminding you of that and how you’re somehow unclear of why after I’ve explained it several times.

I’’m very sorry you can’t wrap your head around this. and, yes, it’s best you don’t respond again, as I’d just keep repeating myself.

gregorum, (edited )

if that’s what you meant, perhaps you should have said that at some point…

I don’t know how this could have been clearer

by saying what you mean and actually providing evidence to back up your claims, as I have said repeatedly.

gregorum, (edited )

except for the first time you said it in your last comment, show me where you said “9/11 was a terrorist attack" before. because what you were arguing before was:

It’s sort of like saying 9/11 was an effective use of terrorism

do you have amnesia?

gregorum,

ok, so, you do have amnesia and have forgotten our entire conversation. well, then I suggest you go back to the beginning because I’m not walking you through this again.

gregorum,

I don’t know. That could become tiresome.

gregorum,

It’s pretty dumb when record companies limit distribution by region like this.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • localhost
  • All magazines
  • Loading…
    Loading the web debug toolbar…
    Attempt #