I think depending on the model, peak is somewhere about 2005 (I’d consider your 2004 right in there) to about 2015. The inclusion of CarPlay was a big plus.
My next car will likely be a mid-teens Golf GTI. It may not be the best in any one category (efficiency, practicality, depreciation, safety, fun, repairability, etc) but it scores high in all of them.
I guess what I’m trying to say is there is a difference simplifying in an acceptable manner (perhaps backup cameras don’t need to be mandated) and doing so in an unsafe manner; I don’t think making seatbelts, airbags, or anti-lock brakes optional in the name of “simplicity” is a good idea.
Depending on how long ago you define as the period we had “good” cars, it might be an order of magnitude less safe. It’s hard to separate the unnecessary tech with things that have made cars exponentially safer over the past few decades.
I too wish for vehicles that are more simple, but let’s not toss the “safety” baby out with the “upgrades” bathwater.
I’m certain airbags are a legal requirement.
Allow me to be the first.
I drive an EV now. It’s super convenient not having to fuel up once a week. It’s nice just charging at home overnight. Long distance trips are not so convenient, but doable. The money savings on gas is significant, but tire usage seems to be higher, and depreciation is higher than any vehicle I’ve owned. There’s the looming thought of having to replace the battery someday.
More than anything, I’m tired of cars feeling like spaceships, and EVs are among the most space shippy.
My next car will likely be an efficient but fun four door ICE hatchback (think European sensibility) from six or seven years ago if I can find one with low miles.
No shade on those loving EVs, I think it’s great that the majority of people are moving or would like to move away from ICE vehicles. But so long as they feel like spaceships to me and depreciate like room temperature milk, there’s room in my garage for an efficient gasoline car.
I kinda like Ray-Ban (their luxotica ties notwithstanding) and my current eyeglasses and sunglasses are RB. But the partnership with Meta is what really turns me off, and may actually persuade me to make sure my next pair are not RB.
I think it was alluding to it, but stopped short of explicitly saying it. I felt it was worth explicitly saying.
Calling it two football field would still work. Americans would think brown oblong ball field, everyone else would think black and white orb game. In in all cases they’d be thinking of essentially the same measurement.
I guess the remaining 1% is YouTube?
I’m not so sure. If it’s done to encourage public transportation and biking, and the money generated by parking funds increased non-car infrastructure like bike lanes etc, then sure.
But just slapping parking meters on formerly free parking and the money simply going into the city’s general fund (which is what I’m sure is happening here) I wouldn’t call it an improvement.
I’d agree that making a structural change to remove vehicle parking and install bicycle/public transportation infrastructure sounds great.
But I read the comment above yours as saying that the mayor simply made existing free parking into paid parking. Not sure that’s doing much other than reducing the business activity in the area.
I bet the top ten percent of titles on Gutenberg make up 90% of downloads.
standardebooks.org is a great place for classics
Thank you, it needed to be said.
I skimmed the article, and read 50 comments per day, not 200. Which certainly changes my thinking some. 50 posts are indisputably difficult (and this crazy) to get to.
But someone who hit 200 comments twice over four years (during only the biggest newsworthy events) isn’t wildly crazy to me.
You’re still phrasing it as 200 comments per day (implying average) which I agree is crazy; exceeding 200 comments a couple times isn’t. Think of it like driving. Driving 200 miles per day is insanity, but driving the family greater than 200 miles in a day to vacation every once in a while is most certainly not.
You know how averages work, right?
Honestly, someone who posts everyday averaging 12 comments is probably crazier than the occasional poster who very occasionally hits 50 200 in a day.
Edit: I misread the limits as being 50 comments, which I stand by as not too crazy now and again. 200 comments/replies even on the most newsworthy days is certainly getting to the ‘difficult to do’ level. I’ll grant you that I’d be hard pressed to get to 200 even if I tried. I consider myself on your side on this one. I’ll only say that citing any average usage per day is unimportant, because there are no limits on the average daily usage, only absolute upper limits.
iPad usability is in a really weird place. It’s definitely the least “usable” of Apple’s platforms, and to be honest I probably wouldn’t be an Apple user at all if all they had was iPadOS and iOS. macOS is still attractive to me (the Liquid Glass theme notwithstanding). For the record, I split my password manager use between Apple Passwords and [now] self-hosted Vaultwarden. Each has advantages, and while I’d like to just use one, having two is working okay for me for now.
Vendor lock in is an issue, true, but it’s a different issue than the enshittification we’re starting to see from Bitwarden. Also, apple passwords isn’t “locked in” per se, as passwords aren’t difficult to export.
Lately, I’m starting to feel like finding good software (often FOSS but not exclusively) is increasingly a hook for later increased monetization. The ‘agreement’ I had with Bitwarden was they provide a solid service, and (while not required) I pay the $10/year honor system fee. That’s been upped to $20 now, and now they’re appearing to move away from their core principles. I won’t be paying for another year.
With Apple, the unspoken agreement is I “overpay” for my hardware, and they don’t have incentive to monetize me otherwise. I’ll admit, there are cracks forming in that agreement, but that’s my read on it currently anyway, and I think probably the person to which you are replying to as well.
and you starve
That’s why “eat the rich” is a thing.
I agree, certainly on the natural scrolling option.
From a separate 9to5mac article:
Typical of 9to5mac “reporting.” The Golden Gate is a natural landmark, it’s the strait between San Francisco and Marin which the famous bridge spans. Nowhere in the OS release even says the word bridge.
Fun fact. While it might seem safe to assume the “gold” in Golden Gate refers to the gold discovery about 100 miles upriver that started the California gold rush, it was in fact named the Golden Gate prior to the gold discovery. John C. Fremont (my favorite early Californian) named it such because of the color of the hillsides when he first arrived.