Good find, I must say I’m surprised that’s legal, but it’s probably more obvious in reality, and it has the sun which is probably also pretty obvious to a human.
But it might fool the Tesla?

Regarding the semi video: WTF?
But I’ve said for years that Tesla cars aren’t safe for roads. And that’s not just the FSD, they are inherently unsafe in many really really stupid ways.
Blinker buttons on the steering wheel. Hidden emergency door handles, emergency breaking for no reason. Distracting screen interface. In Denmark 30% of Tesla 3 fail their first 4 year safety check.
There have been stats publicized that claim they aren’t worse than other cars, when in fact “other cars” were an average of 10 year older. So the newer cars obviously ought to be safer because they should be in better conditions.

In broad terms, that seems to put it about on par with an Intel 386 chip from 1985

At 24 MHz, it’s actually about 4-6 times faster than a full fledged 33 MHz i80386DX with 10 times as many transistors back in the day.
It’s absolutely insane that i386 remained the standard with its inferior high latency design.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acorn_Archimedes

exhibiting BASIC language performance ten times faster than a newly introduced 80386-based computer

That was an 8MHz Arm system, and it was commonly recognized as being clearly faster than a 33MHz i80386DX!
In fact the 8036 was so inefficient at 33MHz it couldn’t even beat the speed of a 16 MHz 80286 on 16 bit code!!
Mips, Alpha, Motorola, Sparc and finally Arm were all better, but they weren’t backed by IBM, and the availability of clones made the PC relatively cheap. But basically everything else was better than Intel.

Unfortunately Arm also lacked a math co-processor, so for tasks that were heavy on FP calculations, an i386 with co-processor was superior.
Also Arm was unable to sell them cheap enough to capture at least a niche market. (Apart from education in UK)
And for the hobbyist an Amiga was way cheaper, and had powerful graphics and sound chips.

How is it misleading?

You can’t be serious? The clickbait image is not something that might actually possibly happen. The image in the video is.

That’s true, but it’s still way more understandable that a car without lidar would be fooled by it. And there is no way you would ever come into such a situation, whereas the image in the thumbnail, could actually happen. That’s why it’s so misleading, can people not see that?
I absolutely hate Elon Musk and support boycott of Tesla and Starlink, but this is a bit too misleading even with that in mind.

What annoys me is that this was an issue as far back as the early 90’s. On DOS and Windows 3.11. It’s such an annoyance that I don’t get how this problem still exist?!
If the unmount function can see if write is finished, a file copy function should obviously be able to see it’¨s own copy state.

Stats made over decades back in 50-70’s

Maybe, but it’s not because of me people get shitty links.

6 hour trial, sounds like proprietary to me.

Privacy Note: Other than intially checking your license key, no requests to DeArrow servers contain your license key.

Edit: I just read the entire text, and it is actually very reasonable, I just caught the license key thing together with the payment option. It’s actually even cheap, so maybe I’ll consider it.

Thanks. 😎
Then imagine why 15% downvote? I suppose it means they don’t see how it’s misleading?

By being different if it’s in the video, I’m just saying it’s OK to make the analogy WITH CONTEXT!
How do you understand it otherwise? It obviously doesn’t change the fact that the thumbnail is clickbait either way.

Maybe I didn’t have sound, and that’s not the problem, the problem is the thumbnail for the video is clickbait, I don’t get why I have to repeat that so many times?
I understand the joke of the analogy to cartoons, and it’s perfectly fine they make that in the video.

Sorry, I mixed up 2 threads.

If it’s made to be misleading and baiting, yes I FUCKING should. And so should you and everybody else.

That’s cool then, but probably not for me. And I still think it’s misleading. If they made the analogy in the video it would be different. But as it is, it looks like clickbait. And honestly using clickbait on children is actually worse.

Since most grownups aren’t interested in safety, I just thought it would be even less for kids.
All sales promotion stats show that car buyers basically don’t care about safety features. Almost all significant safety features are there because of regulation.

Edit:
I can only laugh at the downvoters, you know nothing. It’s been a well established fact that safety doesn’t sell cars since the 50’s.

While driving him from school, he asked me why we can tell it’s a wall but the cars can’t.

Cool inquisitive kid you have there. 👍 😀

Yes, I think a human driver who isn’t half asleep would notice that something is weird, and would at least slow down.

But being dishonest about it, detract rather than add to it.

I know, but if they are about anything serious like tests, I think it’s a fair assumption that the thumbnail represent it reasonably.
If it’s misleading, I don’t want their vomit. They can just fuck right off. We already have more than enough misinformation. I simply don’t want to waste my time on bullshit.

I actually agree, it’s not really a good test. That wall is very realistic. It’s just that people get pissed about negativity.