There goes the Google monopoly case.

Makes sense about NCAP ya. It’ll get tested eventually we’ll just have to wait.

You seem nice

It comes and goes.

Have you seen this crash yet where all 4 participants survived?

https://www.motor1.com/news/731526/tesla-cybertruck-crash-auction/

It’s trashed, but you can see it got wrecked up to the passenger compartment on the front, and the rear is missing all the way into the back wheels.

Neither of those distances is insignificant for a crumple area. That thing had to be flipping and they absorbed that energy.

It’s not that Tesla didn’t choose to have it tested, the agencies haven’t wanted to test it yet.

They don’t test every vehicle and they don’t always test what they think will be low volume vehicles.

Teala could sponsor it, but it’s not like every manufacturer sponsors a vehicle that the testing agencies decide not to test.

For example, I don’t believe the model 3 highland has been tested again after all the changes, and if it has, not all the testing agencies yet.

But… it does have crumple zones.

The entire front and rear castings are designed to shatter in a high energy collision and crumple.

The size of a crumple zone isn’t as important as how it absorbs the energy and dispenses it.

You could have a 20foot crumple zone that’s empty and it’s be useless.

You can see it crumpled here. They’ve also posted a different video on the official X account of a crash test but I won’t post that to avoid linking them. here.

Since you got something so utterly basic wrong and posted it as true, I can only assume the entire post is fabricated.

Edit: took a screen shot instead of video. It crumples all the way past the front wheels

Trump could ask for a and be given a quintillion dollars and they still wouldn’t make a fuss when the debt ceiling comes up.

If it really isn’t about the pensions, then make it take effect the flowing election not this election.

That’s what you need distress codes for.

Destruction of evidence is a much different crime.

I would suspect it’d no longer be legal to hold them indefinitely and instead at best get the max prison sentence for that crime instead.

A us law website says that’s no more than 20y as the absolute max, and getting max would probably be hard if they don’t have anything else on you.

You’d have to weigh that against what’s on the device.

Also, even better if the distress code nukes the bad content, and then has a real 2nd profile that looks real, which makes it even harder to prove you used a distress code.

.

I’m not sure how much it would actually help for a regular thief.

This is about protecting it against more sophisticated attacks. But the rest probably have those means if wanted.

I’ve never said otherwise.

It’s their job to find a way to hack into the phone.

This feature makes that even harder.

Right, but this is about them bypassing you entirely.

They don’t need your fingerprint or pass code if they can bypass it themselves. This feature protects you when they’ve seized it lawfully which can be for many reasons.

That’s all lawful.

They can search you and the area when arrested. They can search the car if they have probable cause that evidence will be in the vehicle

I said have a warrant or seized lawfully, not nust have a warrant.

Edit: I didn’t even write what I said I said correctly. Corrected it lol.

They usually do have a warrant or it was seized lawfully.

This is about keeping them out even when it’s lawful.

It’s not the same.

On an iPhone it’ll reboot after X hours of no use. That means it could go months without rebooting and the day after it’s in police hands it reboots.

The feature you’re talking about would need to be set to reboot every day at a specific time. Now you personally have to deal with that. Also until you unlock the phone as well there could be reduced functionality making it annoying.

Very different.

You Either Die A Hero, Or You Live Long Enough To See Yourself Become The Villain.

He said they could make a bomb in a couple weeks if needed. No specifics on delivery or quality.

Edit: sounds like kyiv is denying the claim made by some insider. So guess this isn’t likely true.

In a new session isn’t there no speaker until one is elected with any rules?

Just don’t accept the rules and go into another cycle of endless votes for speaker.

wiki says

Seek immediate Security Council action to provide assistance to the signatory if they “should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used”.

what assistance would that not be if not protecting them in some way or another?

I think you got that wrong enough it warrants a correction…

They gave them up for assurances that Russia and the USA would protect them if they were attacked.

Edit: that’s why the USA is giving them weapons, they’re honoring the deal, or at least trying to, not 100% sure on specifics, I’m sure it was vague on what protecting them would entail.