Realizing cognitive dissonance can often manifest as anger - is it possible you were beginning to get through to them? Obviously I wasn’t there, I’m just looking for more information!

The police running into the crowd are violent, certainly; as is the white mob. The response to a movement being violent doesn’t make the movement violent, any more than getting mugged makes the victim violent.

I understood US Civil Rights movement to be peaceful, as in the people in the movement did not instigate violence. Calling a protest violent because those in power struck back violently seems nonsensical to me.

I’m just noticing that the / is next to the . on my keyboard…

Did this just start out as a typo?

I don’t! I’m down for storytime!

The problem I see is that I can think of 3 paths forward when 30-40% of the population thinks this way:

1. we can eliminate them from the population through violence, deportation, jail, whatever. That’s the same sort of genocidal behavior we’re objecting to from them, and is a nonstarter

2. we can override their votes, and work hard for generations to keep them suppressed. While more humane than 1, this likely isn’t feasible, and is likely to radicalize them

3. we turn them. Convince them that they were wrong, and bring them around to our way of thinking. This is hard work, but it’s the only stable and humane option I can think of.

So yes, much as it may suck, anything that brings about option 3 is the best action I can see. Including treating MAGA far better than they treat us.

It’s usually for the kid’s safety. Little kids especially run off sometimes; and while it’d be nice to be able to be a continuously attentive parent, sometimes you need to get shit done out and about while they’re with you. Sometimes they’re fine with just being carried or sitting in a shopping cart, but if not, a leash & harness (usually just integrated into a backpack) lets them wander safely while you take care of what you’re there to do.

I don’t think I’ve ever seen a kid older than 4 or so in one.

Polyamory sounds close; if you presume that the other people would be allowed multiple marriages as well.

Nice, thanks!

It sounds utopian…

It’s not that we don’t want robots doing it - honestly that’d be pretty cool. It’s that we want to be sure the people that are being replaced are being taken care of.

There will always be some jobs. That’s no guarantee that there will be enough jobs for everyone to live modest lives on.

Why is that the comparison, though? Sears developed mail-order catalogues in the 1800s. That’s what Amazon replaced.

…okay, I really want to know the story behind that picture!

That can easily lead to “othering” those kids as well. Also, many parents who can still give their kids food from home might still struggle to do that at times.

Schools are already monitoring a whole mess of kids at once. Why not just take care of feeding them too? That ensures that, regardless of what happens at home, they have at least one good meal each day.

Im sure you’re right, but… Couldn’t we just take, like, one knob from one of our billion dollar fighter jets, and pay for mental and social services that way?

Not even from every fighter of that type, just pick the one plane that’s always down for maintenance anyway and, like, lock the AC to one temperature or something. Surely that tiny bit of a multi billion dollar airframe could cover some worthwhile social services?

Why didn’t we ever reopen them?

I mean, I know why we don’t now, but we had a few decades since Reagan of occasionally reasonable administrations…

Reading through the article, it seems like one scenario is that a vehicle stopped at an intersection might be about to pull out, endangering another vehicle about to cross? It seems like the thinking is, if you notice a front/side brake light stops being lit as you approach the intersection, it might indicate they’re about to accelerate - be cautious!

I’m not fully convinced either, it seems like a lot of the benefit they’re projecting is based on analysis of historical collisions, rather than any kind of experimental results. It sounds like the study is to justify expanding research to that sort of simulated experimentation, though - I’m curious what that kind of testing would find.

Sounds like it can help oncoming traffic as well as traffic to either side of the vehicle