• I_Fart_Glitter@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    100
    ·
    5 months ago

    My car makes it slightly difficult to change lanes if I don’t signal, some resistance on the steering wheel and a warning beep beep beep that I’m “drifting.” There are some terrible roads around here that confuse the sensors so I do a bit of steering wheel arm wrestling now and then just to keep going straight.

    • snooggums@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      72
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      That is why I turned lane assist off after a dozen false positives that felt like the car was going to steer me into danger with no benefits.

      Parking assist got turned off when parking in a garage set off a cacophony.

      • whodatdair@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        51
        ·
        5 months ago

        It was when I was holding leftmost lane position passing a semi and it beeped and tried to steer me into said semi that I decided it can fuck off for ever lol

      • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        5 months ago

        In my experience, lane assist is pretty good on the highways, and actively terrible everywhere else.

        The only “feature” I hated more than lane assist was hill start assist. Chirped my tires, or stalled completely, on every fucking hill.

        • snooggums@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          Do you have trouble staying in your lane on the highway?

          That’s the easiest place to stay in a lane.

          • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            5 months ago

            Lane assist seems to agree with you. It is only able to do its job on the highway. Elsewhere, it actively seeks head-on collisions.

            • snooggums@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              5 months ago

              Its job is apparently making up for lazy people who can’t pay attention to the multi ton vehicle they are driving.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            5 months ago

            The one in my wife’s car doesn’t. It just beeps when she crosses the lane and it can resist if you turn on that setting (she only has the beeping on). It’s not hard to trigger when it’s not supposed to be triggered. I always tell her she’s making the car angry.

      • NABDad@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        How strong is the lane assist in your car? If I was weak enough to even be bothered by the lane assist in my car, I’d figure it was time to stop driving. It certainly has never come close to overriding my steering.

        • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          5 months ago

          Ever drive on a construction zone where they’ve started to rip up pavement and half the lane is an inch higher than the other half? Ever change lanes into that lane, and feel the steering fight you or lurch as you cross that lip?

          The problem isn’t the strength needed to overcome the lane assist. It’s easy to fight it. The problem comes when you know you are well centered in the lane. But, all the sudden, you’re being pushed left or right, and you have to quickly determine whether you’re feeling uneven pavement. Or maybe a tie rod end or a ball joint has some slop in it. Maybe the power steering pump is leaking and running dry. Or, maybe the fucking lane assist thinks a strip of tar in the middle of the lane is a lane marker, and it wants me to cross the centerline.

          The problem isn’t whether or not I can take it in a fair fight. The problem is that it throws a punch.

          • NABDad@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Well, that’s kind of what I’m saying. That’s insane. In my truck I wouldn’t even describe the lane assist as a nudge. It’s just barely enough to be perceivable. Certainly nothing that’s going to make me question anything other than if I’m over the line.

            • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              5 months ago

              You’ve become conditioned to consider a “nudge” to be lane assist helpfully pushing on the steering wheel, to move you toward the center of the lane. Your muscle memory reacts to such a nudge by accepting it, allowing it.

              30 years of driving has conditioned me to consider a “nudge” to be an indication that something is pushing on the car, moving me away from where I intend to be. My muscle memory reacts to such a nudge by immediately arresting that push and reversing it.

              • NABDad@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                5 months ago

                No, I haven’t been conditioned into anything. 38 years of driving taught me to be able to tell what is happening because I’m aware of the road. I know I didn’t just drive off the edge of the road, because I know where the road is and I know where my tires are.

                I’ve had lane assist in my truck for 2 years and I learned what it feels like. However, it’s clear that different manufacturers implemented it differently. All I can say is, it appears Honda got it right.

            • snooggums@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              5 months ago

              Different cars have different levels of pushing back. My in laws’ Subaru twisted hard like bumping a curb while my Honda was a slight bit of resistance.

        • snooggums@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          5 months ago

          The wheel jerking makes me think that I’m losing control and is extremely distracting.

          It isn’t about losing tug of war, it is about losing focus.

    • Mango@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      I hate all that. Bro I hate of my mouse sensor has angle snapping, prediction, acceleration, or smoothing.

      I loathe the concept of electronic throttle bodies and anything after 2005 has them. I don’t want my car to get to think about it after I press the throttle. Air now! Goddamn asthmatic cars. I don’t even want a manual transmission.

  • frezik@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    86
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Motherboard front panel connectors should be officially standardized. These fucking things have been basically the same since the 90s, but we still have to line up all the individual wires instead of having one plug.

    Oh, and fix RGB headers while we’re at it. They’re the flimseist fucking thing, and you shouldn’t be able to use a 4 pin plug on a three pin header.

    • HeckGazer@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      5 months ago

      Also modular power supplies while we’re at it thanks. 20 years and the cables still can’t be reused/you have to remanage the whole damn case when doing a swap

      • Longpork3@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 months ago

        That’s already a thing? I have several power supplies that have completely detachable cables allowing the psu to be swapped directly. Not sure how standardised the psu side of the cable is between manufacturers, but this does exist in some form.

        • lemmynparty@lemmings.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          5 months ago

          They’re talking about standardisation. Unfortunately, many manufacturers use different pinouts on the psu side. Sometimes they’re identically shaped but have the polarity reversed, or 12v on a 5v rail. Pure evil…

    • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Make the manufacturers comply with standard rgb headers. I’ve got several accessories that came with rgb headers that I have no idea what the hell they were supposed to connect to other than maybe some proprietary controller. Absurd when most any decent common mobo all use the same connector type.

  • Username@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    77
    ·
    5 months ago

    This is probably the best thing about lane assist on modern cars.

    When changing lanes without a turn signal, the wheel resists a bit.

    I have actually seen people I drove with be annoyed by it. I absolutely love it, because it is only annoying if you don’t use your turn signals.

    • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      5 months ago

      This is probably the best thing about lane assist on modern cars.

      Absolutely not. It’s fucking dangerous. The one time I drove a rental like that, I went through a construction area downtown, and it tried to steer me right into a construction fence when I was following the yellow temporary construction lane markers that were going around the fenced off area.

        • Hagdos@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          26
          ·
          5 months ago

          A car nudging you towards an accident is dangerous, even if it’s not forcing you into an accident.

          An unnecessary distraction that needs active attention in a chaotic situation is a bad thing, bad driver or not. And yeah, there are many bad drivers out there. Cars should be designed to be driven by bad drivers, not armchair experts.

          • Ziglin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            5 months ago

            Why not just have expert bus drivers and as few cars as possible by having proper driving tests. (looking at the US)

            • Hagdos@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              5 months ago

              Yeah, but that’s a whole 'nother topic.

              I live in a country with proper driving tests, but most drivers (myself included) are still shit at driving. Even professional bus drivers are limited humans.

              • Ziglin@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                I agree, but still fewer drivers should be an improvement for safety and climate and one day maybe most roads could be replaced by train tracks with bike lanes on either side.

                • Hagdos@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  I agree, I just really want to insert my non-relevant ideas into the discussion

        • Dozzi92@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          What if their arms are just really weak, you do have to turn the wheel slightly more than normal.

          • SoGrumpy@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            If their arms are so weak as to be unable to overpower the lane-assist nudge, I really hope for everyone’s sake, that they are not behind the wheel of a moving vehicle. The ‘nudge’ isn’t strong in any sense of the word. You can overpower it with two fingers if squeezed tight. My semi truck had lane and steer assist, which nudged a little harder to steer the truck back into the lane, but that, too, could be overcome with a tight two-fingers grip.

    • BlitzoTheOisSilent@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      5 months ago

      I disagree, it’s annoying in general.

      If I need to go around, say, a mail truck parked on the side of the road, the steering assist in our work van starts to rumble or shake or whatever it does. If there’s construction, you guessed it, it doesn’t understand that I have to cross over the line to continue driving, and if I have a turn signal on, the cop/worker directing traffic is going to expect me to go that way.

      If a car is driving in the opposite direction and starts to ride/cross the double yellow lines, me moving over causes the vehicle to resist and fight me, potentially putting me into an accident because I didn’t think to put my turn signal on in a split-second situation.

      My car should not be able to, idk what word I’m looking for, override me? People need to take driving more seriously and stop handing off their responsibilities to a computer system/sensor that can not only fail, but also doesn’t understand real world applications.

      • Final Remix@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        5 months ago

        Lane assist fucking hates narrow and or curved roads, too. I turn that shit off when I’m driving my parents’ car. I really hate the steering wheel trying to decide what’s best for me.

      • deo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        5 months ago

        I love the lane assist on my car. It does resist me a little bit in the situations you describe, but it’s not a strong resistance. Just enough to get my attention if i do it by accident, but not enough to hinder me going where i need to go.

        Now i’m curious what the lane assist parameters look like for different makes and models…

        • Obi@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Mine works like yours, it’ll jottle me a bit but if I want the car to go there it goes there, I don’t need special efforts to make it happen. It also has the auto-brake thing in case you’re about to rear end someone and I’ve set it to high to see it working but even that I only managed to make it beep and flash but not actually brake yet, looks like it would only do it pretty late. I think most people complaining about this are having an “back in my days” moment tbh, but maybe there are indeed cars out there where the implementation is more invasive.

          • MrShankles@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            I drove a Honda Pilot with lane assist, and I hated how it jottled the steering wheel. It felt dangerous to me how much it resisted, even if it’s not really that much.

            I currently drive a Honda Fit with lane assist, and I love it. Literally use the lane assist every time. It beeps and has a warning on the dash about leaving the lane, and maybe it even has the same amount of resistance, but it feels a lot safer/natural

            I think I just don’t like the steering wheel “rumbling/jottling” or whatever, because it’s like a false tactile feedback. I’m sure I could adjust to it, but it’s not the best implementation imo

            Also, the auto-brake thing (is amazing and should be standard) doesn’t come on until you are wildly close (and the distance that it engages, seems to be speed dependent). So you’ll really only see it engage if you’re about to be in a wreck, or you’re really ballsy trying to “test it”

        • GTG3000@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          5 months ago

          Anecdotally, I’ve heard people say they almost got into a crash because of lane assist, especially with the white/yellow temporary lines. But that does depend a ton on the car.

          I have to agree that if you have to turn, you should be able to turn, lane assist be damned - we’re not yet at the level where a car can accurately judge 100% of the road situations. But it’s probably a good thing we’re moving into a future where crossing lanes without turn signals feels like a virtual bump on the road.

        • noughtnaut@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          On a Hyundai, there’s a very annoying beeping pretty much coinciding with the wheels hitting the lane markings - which IMHO is too little too late, and besides around here most lane markings are made to rumble so it’s not like an additional audio signal is needed.

          On my ex’es brand new car, that feature got turned off after very few kilometres, and has stayed off ever since.

    • sep@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      5 months ago

      Suicide assist is horrible. Around here there is no middle of the road separator, to narrow road. So it tries to hit head first the traffic in the opposite way.

  • AbsentBird@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    73
    ·
    5 months ago

    If you own a house with nobody living in it, you gotta pay rent to the state each month for the privilege of keeping it empty.

    • dutchkimble@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      5 months ago

      They do this in India. You’re allowed 2 homes, 3rd onwards you have to pay Income tax for deemed rent received if it’s empty.

    • Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      5 months ago

      After a while, it’s just part of the cost.

      Not much of an expense imo. Like giving a speeding ticket to a billionaire, it doesn’t actually mean much if you’re rich enough.

      Id rather make the initial purchase cost extraordinarily expensive after buying more than two houses. Third house is 5x the cost. Fourth house is 50x the cost. Nobody needs four houses so it’s a fuck you tax.

      • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        5 months ago

        And at scale it will eat into investor returns, making holding them empty a less profitable endeavor. They would suddenly go from having a neutral MRR asset turned into a negative MRR if they choose not to rent out. You can bet your sweet bippy that the bean counters are going to notice the difference and argue to sell or rent them to cut the expenses.

      • AbsentBird@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        It’s not just another cost of doing business though, it’s specifically a cost of not doing business.

        So imagine someone has been buying up homes to rent them. Market rate for rent is $1000 and they own 1000 units (just to make the math easy). That means they would profit $1 million every month with every unit filled, and lose $1 million every month for leaving every unit empty.

        Now imagine they have half the units filled, so they are getting $0 each month. They could try and raise the rent over market rate to cover the cost, but that would make it harder to fill the empty units and encourage their tenants to leave. If they lower the rent a bit though, they could fill the empty units and erase the cost entirely. Now imagine every landlord is in this dilemma; it puts the pressure onto them to appeal to prospective tenants. They could even increase profit by housing people for free, just filling units with the homeless to reduce costs.

        If they don’t change behavior and just eat the cost, then that’s more money for the state to invest in housing programs.

      • BowtiesAreCool@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        30
        ·
        5 months ago

        But they mean specifically a vacancy tax. So anyone who owned vacant property would have a large additional payment or get it rented

        • cheddar@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          I don’t see this working. Not only the property owners would transfer this cost to your monthly payments, the government would need an enormous bureaucracy to actually control and enforce this law. I don’t believe this is technically possible to achieve.

      • AbsentBird@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        5 months ago

        No, like market rate for the property. Everyone pays property tax, regardless of whether the property is vacant or occupied.

        • Nick@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          My dad inherited my grandma’s ancient house recently and is practically forced to find a way to remodel it to be rentable because there is a imputed rental value tax where I’m from.

          • AbsentBird@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            5 months ago

            What’s the alternative, just leave it empty?

            I would think it could also be acceptable to transfer ownership to a relative who doesn’t already own a home. It just seems like a waste to have a house with nobody living in it while so many people are unhoused.

            • Nick@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              I guess he could sell it but then its pretty likely that it’s brought by a property developer, as we can’t afford to buy it off him. As it stands, the house isn’t really suitable to live in

  • Darohan@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    72
    ·
    5 months ago

    The more properties you own, the more tax you pay on the price of the next one - excluding if you only own one, but escalating quickly after like 3 or 4.

    • Kayana@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      5 months ago

      Possible formula: Tax for n-th house = n-th Fibonacci number + 5 * max(0, n - 2). So low numbers like three get penalized by that linear part, and high numbers grow exponentially due to the Fibonacci number.

      • RagingRobot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Ok now it’s starting to get confusing enough to fit into our tax system. Can we add more variables? Lol

    • BedSharkPal@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      5 months ago

      This is so obviously what needs to happen. The fact that it hasn’t says everything you need to know about current governments.

    • Got_Bent@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      5 months ago

      Texas is that way to a point. Your primary residence gets enormous tax breaks. Any property after that, fuck you, pay up. The downside to that is that it contributes to the high cost of rent as the owner passes it along to the tenant.

      • Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        Does it increase per property owned though? They can’t keep passing on the tax increase to the tenant if at a certain point they own 1000 houses and now their tax on the last one is 7 times higher than the rent on it.

        That’s what we should be doing any house after your second gets increased a ton per house. Make it untenable for people to own rental properties. I don’t mind someone having a vacation house or two if they can afford it. But nobody needs 10 vacation houses, they’re rental or investment properties at that point so fuck them.

      • RagingRobot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Are you talking about a homestead exemption? I think most places have something like that but it’s just a discount on the house you live in so not an increase on the other properties. They would just get normal tax rates for any additional properties. I think making it an exponential tax would make a huge difference.

        • Got_Bent@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Yes homestead. I’m not sure how other states do it.

          Texas increased from ten thousand to twenty five thousand to forty thousand to a hundred thousand in a short period.

          So semantics. I say increase for other houses, you say discount for primary house. Either way you choose to phrase it, you pay less for your primary residence and more for other properties.

    • Kit@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 months ago

      My city somewhat does this. You get a significant tax break on your primary residence, so if you rent out your house you pay more.

      • RagingRobot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        But if you rent out 1000 houses you pay the same tax rate and if you were to rent 3. Op was saying that it should go up per house. So by the time you have like 3 or 4 you can’t afford more.

    • chimasterflex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      Serious question, couldn’t you bypass this by just setting up different LLCs that only have one or two properties under them?

      • Wild_Mastic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        They already do this. In my old job, the boss had 0 properties, he just used company money, company cars etc and had multiple of them

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      57
      ·
      5 months ago

      That sounds like it would be a good idea, but there is a strange but significant cadre of right-wing Star Trek fans. I think they just pay attention to the pew pew space battles and ignore everything else or something.

      • lugal@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        5 months ago

        I honestly see why. While I love star trek, it has a very strong power structure “with the right people in power”, as if power itself wouldn’t corrupt people. The admirals may not always be right in the beginning but they accept their wrongs and have no bad intentions and the heroes are always celebrated by the establishment.

        This can be understood as “this is the perfect world where even authorities are good” or as “I told you, authorities are the good guys”. I, as a left libertarian, prefer Farscape (and still watch every star trek show)

        • CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          5 months ago

          Exactly! The TOS/TNG era are “benevolent authoritarianism” and conservatives, of course, see themselves as the good guys. “If things only went our way, our society would be perfect, just like Star Trek!”

          I think Edington said it best. Paraphrasing, “[The Federation] are even worse than the Borg. At least they tell you about their plans for assimilation. You’re more insidious you assimilate people I think they don’t even know.”

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          I never thought of it that way, but you do have a point. I still think it’s more pew pew than anything else though.

          • lugal@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            Steve Shives (I hope I got the spelling correct) made a video why conservatives like star trek and a part of it is they see it as stories of other worlds and by doing so ignore all the allegorical implications. “A planet where people have the false gender assigned to them at birth? How truly alien!”

            And to be fair: escapism is a legitimate goal of scifi and media in general. You watch scifi to enter a different world, for at least an hour a week be free of all your problems in the here and now.

        • samus12345@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          5 months ago

          Considering the Terran Empire ended up being conquered, this tracks with them idolizing other losers, like Nazis and the Confederacy.

      • Deconceptualist@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        IMO conservatives are either Klingons, Ferengi, or deluded enough to think they’d be chosen to join the Q Continuum. And Libertarians think they’re Romulans or Cardassians but aren’t actually that organized or clever.

      • BakerBagel@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        I can’t help bit notice all these “debate me” chuds talk exactly like Gene Roddenberry’s writting style. Why does every conversation or discussion devlove into “the logic of your argument” “you misunderstood the logic of what i am saying”.

      • RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Sure, but I still genuinely believe the Gospel of Picard would have a net positive effect. Far moreso than the bible, which a good portion already have read.

    • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      5 months ago

      That type of person will arrive at the conclusion “see, it’s okay to do eugenics and have nuclear wars, since humanity will turn out okay anyways”.

  • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    All adult sex work should be legal across the board. Anyone, of legal age, should be allowed to not only sell their services but they should be able to pay taxes and be allowed to unionize and collect benefits from any organization they work for (brothels).

    A lot of the people in this world who are messed up in the head just need to get laid, and those doing to dirty work should be celebrated and rewarded for their efforts. I genuinely think this would make the world a better place.

    • ReginaPhalange@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      5 months ago

      people…just need to get laid

      A Hollywood induced fantasy.
      People need therapy, and substituting that with sex is enabling the messed up folks to stay messeed up.

    • The Menemen!@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      That is pretty much how it is in Germany. Illegal (outside of the regulation avoiding taxes) and forced prostitution is still a huge problem. There is just way too much money to be made in that business…

      I personally prefer the Nordic models therfore.

      • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        The problem in the countries that generally allow prostitution is that, though it has been legalized, it is still horribly stigmatized. Which creates that gap where forced prostitution can flourish. If a “business” is using illegal immigrants as forced labor, who can they turn to for help? That’s a double dose of stigma right there. But even a native person who’s being coerced would likely get little in the way of help since “upstanding” society looks down on their chosen profession.

        Our collective worldly society needs to stop looking down their nose at sex workers as some kind of deviancy.

        But then, seeing how religious extremists seem to be gaining power all over, I doubt we’ll see any positive change on any of these things.

        • The Menemen!@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          The pimps that are trafficking over don’t care about stigmas and the women aren’t afraid about getting stigmatized, but about getting send back to their home-countries.

          • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            You’re reading comprehension is lacking. The people I am referring to having a stigma against prostitution are not the pimps or the girls who are performing. It’s the law and the society of people who think prostitution is a lowly profession for degenerates.

    • Alienmonkey@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 months ago

      BMW has had lane assist (I believe standard) for a few years now. As others above have said, it gives resistance and visible feedback with varying degrees of force if you try to change lanes without a blinker. Many others makes now do as well.

      Essentially, in a 2018 or newer model BMW it is a pain in the ass to change lanes - even on an empty road - if you don’t use a blinker. And it probably snitches on you to your insurance company if you frequently make the light come on.

      As for the lowered 2011 3 series with the loud exhaust and not quite right looking M badges passing you in a cloud of strawberry mountain dew flavored vapor, well… yeah what do you expect. The forest of little tree air fresheners makes it hard to see through the rear view anyway.

      • BigDaddySlim@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        I actually had a 2019 430i until a couple months ago and it did not have lane keep assist standard. It only had had the assisted blind spot monitoring.

        My new (to me) 21 Rav4 does and it has some aggressive LKA which gets a little annoying when you’re on a narrow road with cars parked on it which you have to go over the line to avoid and it tries jerking you back. I also disabled the DSM so it can’t phone home and tattle to my insurance company.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      5 months ago

      It’s such a lib solution. “Let’s make sure guns are inaccessible except to rich people”.

      • Deconceptualist@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 months ago

        That wasn’t part of his standup act but it could be a funny addition… if it wasn’t so close to the truth.

    • Trailblazing Braille Taser@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      First time I’m hearing of this, but it makes perfect sense! Another angle would be to reduce the tax in exchange for harm reducing behavior like taking a voluntary safety class.

      • CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        5 months ago

        We could fix so many problems with mandatory training.

        Yes you have the right to keep and bear arms. On your own property. You want to take them somewhere else? Mandatory training and licensing. Just like we do with cars. At a bare minimum.

        And I say this as a veteran and gun owner. The absolute lack of even having to know the basics of gun safety is appalling to me.

        • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          5 months ago

          Most states do have mandatory classes, shooting tests, and exams to get a license to carry.

          And license-holders commit almost no crime, statistically-speaking. People who go out of their way and spend extra money to comply with the law tend to be law-abiding.

          • CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            5 months ago

            As a license holder I’m well aware of all that. You typically only need a license to carry concealed. At least in my state, open carry is legal almost everywhere and requires nothing. It’s those people that need the training.

            The real way to do it is require a license, along with recurring training requirements, to BUY and own gun, not just carry one. But the NRA and the politicians they own have a shit fit over any reasonable barrier to gun ownership. They are perfectly ok with sacrificing school children over the issue.

            • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              5 months ago

              I’m from Texas, where they removed most licensing requirements and it’s idiotic. You still need one to carry on a college campus and certain other state-owned facilities, but it’s mostly a free-for-all.

              I still keep my License to Carry up to date because I think I should have to maintain a license. It also let’s me skip the security line in some state facilities (including the Capitol) where license holders can carry.

              I used to also shoot weekly during lunch break at nearby range too to keep my skills up. Now I only go a few times a year because a buying a case of 9mm just about requires taking out a second mortgage. I also rarely carry, since in business casual it’s hard to conceal anything but a pocket 380, and I’m so bad with my LCP I’d have trouble shooting my car while sitting inside it.

          • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            5 months ago

            My hot take that I’m sure I’ll get buried for is that in the US, proper firearm safety and training should be a mandatory middle school class. There’s just too many guns. Even if you don’t keep them in your house, your kid’s friend might. Even if some kid joins a gang and has a shootout with another gang, at least they won’t just spray and pray and kill an innocent bystander. I see no downsides except that progressives get apopleptic whenever anyone mentions guns.

            • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              5 months ago

              Agreed. We learn CPR when though we don’t plan on heart attacks. People should be taught basic firearm safety.

              • Bgugi@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                Stop, drop, and roll caused me to seriously overestimate the number of times I would be on fire in my life.

            • hydrospanner@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              5 months ago

              I hate making something like that mandatory, but another benefit would be to reduce the stigma of guns in general.

              It always surprises me how frequently I hear from otherwise pretty open minded people some version of, “I don’t own guns and I’ve never needed a gun. Therefore nobody anywhere needs one or should have one for any reason and I’d fully support completely banning them, and if that violates the constitution, so what, it’s what I want.”

              Further, gun education would reduce the ideas and legislation to restrict guns based on nonsense. There’s a lot of fear of “scary guns” based on little more than superficial appearance, and I even see a lot of ideas from people claiming to want compromise, but it usually comes down to one of a few things: some arbitrary delineation between guns they’re okay with because they don’t look scary, something that would do little more than make criminals out of otherwise law abiding people, or depriving law abiding citizens of constitutionally guaranteed rights without due process.

        • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          We already have the legal mechanism necessary to enact mandatory training.

          The militia is “the whole of the people”. Congress is empowered under Article I Section 8 parts 15 and 16 to “prescribe discipline” (read: “training standards”) for the militia. They don’t have the power to mandate training only to those people who choose to keep and bear arms, but they do have the power to mandate training for everyone.

          So, let’s have a high school, senior-year class on safe handling. More importantly, let’s have a class on the laws regulating the use of force, so everyone is aware of when we can use force against another, and when force may be used against us.

      • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        I’m all for this. I mean, gunpowder is not particularly difficult to manufacture. If the legal sources of ammunition charge $5000 per bullet, I could make a fortune with blackmarket black powder.

        (Ok, I’m not actually “all for this”…)

  • Aux@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    5 months ago

    Imagine a kid runs out on the road suddenly… What a dumb fucking idea!

      • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        They also asked for ideas that would make the world a better place, which this wouldn’t. So it’s just a dumb idea with mainly negative side effects.

        • decivex@yiffit.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          I think they weren’t asking for an idea that would actually make the world a better place but rather one that somebody on some level believes would make the world a better place. Hence it still being a stupid idea.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            5 months ago

            If it were somehow magically possible to force people to use turn signals but only when they turn at intersections or change lanes, I think it would, in fact, make the world a better place. Because it would mean less car crashes.

            But it’s not possible, which is why it’s a dumb idea.

    • MataVatnik@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      The blood of children must be sacrificed if we want to live in a world with good driving etiquette

    • oxomoxo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      The smarter version of this idea is the turn signal comes on automatically in the direction you turn.

      • Aux@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        It’s not. The point of a turning signal is to give a warning to fellow drivers in advance. Turning it on right when you’re turning is way too late. Just learn to drive properly for fucks sake!

        • oxomoxo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          The smarter version of a dumb idea is still a dumb idea. No one is advocating seriously for any of this because of the obvious flaws.

    • drosophila@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      5 months ago

      I think you should be allowed one sign on the building itself and a listing in some sort of directory and that’s it.

      • Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yea as much as we hate marketing it’s necessary to some degree for us to even know that things exist. How do you think new medications for yet untreated diseases get spread? Those companies pay a ton in marketing to get the meds out into the world and in the hands of doctors. Lots more people would be dying of stuff we have the cure for if they couldn’t advertise meds.

        Directories for specific products would be good though. If I need a kitchen gadget I can go to a directory of kitchen or food goods and look around. Between that and word of mouth we would be covered.

  • 58008@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    5 months ago

    Instantaneous, lifelong driving bans for any driver who is found to be texting or intoxicated behind the wheel.

    • Persen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      I respectfully disagree. People, who depend on cars for their job would lose the license and their job, making them drink more.

      • philipsdirk@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        39
        ·
        5 months ago

        I respectfully disagree. People that cannot bring up the discipline to drive sober and keep their attention on the road, even if their jobs would depend on it, shouldn’t have the privilege of being allowed to operate a machine that can easily kill when making a mistake or misjudgment.

      • shadowedcross@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        5 months ago

        Respectfully, so what? If you drive for your livelihood then it’s your own damn fault if you get banned from it for doing something illegal.

      • acockworkorange@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        You spectacularly missed the point of DUI law. Society couldn’t give two shits if someone is drinking themselves to an early grave. It’s when they endanger other people that it becomes an issue. That’s why it’s driving under the influence, not existing.

        Many countries will judge a DUI induced kill a murder, because the person who chooses to drink and drive knows that killing someone is a probable outcome and chose to do it anyway.

      • stormeuh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Agreed, and I respectfully disagree with everyone else replying to you.

        Relying on your car for your job is a much wider criterion than driving as your job. In car-centric places like the US (outside of the big cities) that’s probably 99% of the population. Couple that with the piss poor social safety net and losing your license literally means starvation.

        This still doesn’t mean I endorse or agree with people driving distracted in any way. If revoking someone’s license meant removing them from the road but not destroying their life, I would do that in a heartbeat.

    • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      Realistically, they still drive. They just don’t have insurance so the second person they hit is fucked.

  • credit crazy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    5 months ago

    Considering I see some people mentioning stuff like swerving to avoid obstacles or temporary construction lanes not to mention curvey roads so I propose what about automatic turn signals that activate when it detects the driver trying to turn without signaling

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      75
      ·
      5 months ago

      Because, and I have no idea why so many people don’t get this, you’re supposed to signal you’re going to turn, then slow down, then turn. That’s how you safely let anyone behind you know you’re going to do that.

      I can’t tell you how many times I’ve almost rear-ended someone because they weren’t using their turn signals until they had already started turning. You might as well not use them at all for all the good that does.

      Which is why it’s an incredibly dumb idea. It’s not actually possible. But it would make the world a better place.

      • AmosBurton_ThatGuy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        5 months ago

        A few days ago I ran out to get a few things, and this car ahead of me is going 20Km/h below the 50 limit for 5 minutes, then comes to a dead stop in an intersection, starts slowly turning and then puts on their blinker. Honked at them for being a fucking dumbass and they just wave me off like I’m the asshole

        God I fucking hate how easy it is to get and keep a license. Enforcement needs to be much stricter because there are far too many morons on the road.

        • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          5 months ago

          i want to live in a world where only those who truly have no other option choose to drive, and even a minor mistake in traffic immediately costs you your license and you have to re-take it from scratch.

          It’s insane to just let anyone drive a multi-ton vehicle capable of going 120+ km/h for personal transport, if people are going to do so they damn well better do so carefully.

          • CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            5 months ago

            even a minor mistake in traffic immediately costs you your license

            Well that’s dumbest thing I’ve heard in a while. Just say you want to eliminate all cars and be done with it. No human being could meet that standard, because even the best drivers make a minor mistake once in a while. Won’t even get into reacting to an emergency where you have a split second to decide what to do. We are not omniscient robots.

          • Emerald@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            i want to live in a world where only those who truly have no other option choose to drive

            That’s how you get terrible drivers. Meanwhile those who like driving will care about doing it more safely then those who are forced to drive.

        • Aceticon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          I live in a country were, without exaggeration, 90%+ of drivers don’t use turn indicators or do it last minute unless is for their own benefit (for example they’d turning left and need to cross the opposite lane in).

          If it’s for the safety of others, especially pedestrians, forget about it.

          I just so happen to have lived 2 decades abroad, one of which in Northern Europe, so this crap (and the trying to bully pedestrians on zebra crossings) gets on my nerves big time.

      • eezeebee@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        5 months ago

        Because, and I have no idea why so many people don’t get this, you’re supposed to signal you’re going to turn, then slow down, then turn. That’s how you safely let anyone behind you know you’re going to do that.

        Damn right. I was taught to give a minimum 3 blinks before turning. That also gives you time to look around for other vehicles/pedestrians before committing to the turn.

        • Obi@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          Yes, but also don’t turn them on until the last car that was passing you is slightly in front of you, too many people that turn them on while you’re still a bit behind, potentially in their blind spot, which can make you think they didn’t see you and maybe even swerve as a reflex.

      • Ferris@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        5 months ago

        lol. imagine being a 30,000lb vehicle and some dingdong in a rush swerves in front of you with their 2,000 lb vehicle (because getting in your lane early is an ancient, lost courtesy) and decelerates by 30mph over the course of three seconds to pull into mcdonalds, setting off several of your vehicle’s alert systems and automatically registering you for a performance review from your manager in addition to elevating your heart rate substantially

      • greenskye@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        5 months ago

        In the book version of Hitchhiker’s guide to Galaxy highly advanced elevators are given limited precognition in order to proactively be on the floor and open just as someone wanting to use an elevator arrives. So maybe in some highly advanced future where we inexplicably still use cars our turn signals can see a few seconds into the future and turn themselves on before we turn.

    • CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      I like this idea but with a twist. If you manually activate the turn signal before turning, you’re good to go. If you fail to activate, a big lightboard on the back of your car lights up saying “I forgot to signal” and then they automatically turn on anyway. Now we have shame in play. Some people are immune to shame though, so you get, let’s say, 2 of these a day, or 4 a week, or whatever, for free to account for the unexpected. If you exceed that you have to take an online remedial training class. If you get dinged again within one year you have to take an in-person class. 3 times in a year and every time thereafter, and you get points on your license. After 5 or 6 times you’d lose your license. This way normal people in abnormal circumstances aren’t impacted, and the bad drivers slowly get escalated into either doing it right or losing the privilege to drive.

    • Kairos@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      Large [multi-lane] highway curves.

      Computers are stupid. A"I" is stupid. Humans are smart. Trust humans.