Nacdor

According to multiple Tesla owners in another thread, Autopilot will continue to drive as long as the seatbelt is buckled. There doesn't need to be weight in the driver's seat.

Unable to reply to comments -- edited to remove.

Response to dang: I disagree with the no-delete policy (our comments are ours and we should have the ability to delete them), but more importantly I refuse to leave a comment up when my ability to reply has been disabled.

Edited: Nevermind, I guess HN users prefer to remain unaware of certain undocumented behavior.

To dang: I disagree with the no-delete policy (our comments are ours and we should have the ability to delete them), but more importantly I refuse to leave a comment up when my ability to reply has been disabled.

> “[Investigators] are 100-percent certain that no one was in the driver seat driving that vehicle at the time of impact,” Harris County Precinct 4 Constable Mark Herman said. “They are positive.”

This would only be possible if they were using the autopilot feature.

> the fire service did not know how to deal with the fire.

Tesla's advice is "let it burn":

> Tesla’s guidance suggests it’s better to let the fire burn out than continuing to try to put it out.

> The fact that modern society can be SO smart some times and yet so incredibly idiotic is so frustrating to me.

The CDC and FDA both agree that use of the J&J vaccine should be paused so they can further study this previously unknown side effect.

Maybe someone here could help you get in touch with them since you clearly know something they don't?

> namely that his works will be quoted beyond the lifespan of his contemporary readers

I have never seen PG quoted anywhere, not even on HN.

Once again, you are ignoring the context in which the statement was made and then using that to change the subject and justify your pedantry.

The statement was obviously about personality traits, that much was clear based on the context in which the statement was made (this HN thread). You are now ignoring the context in which the statement was made and instead focusing on the use of the word 'context' within the statement itself. To make it easier for you to understand, here is what was implied by the statement given the context in which it was made "There's literally no context where attributing PERSONALITY qualities to people based on their skin color is OK."

Your argument about medical conditions is not only wrong (as pointed out by another commenter), it's completely irrelevant and off-topic. The discussion was only about personality traits until you tried to derail it.

You're changing the subject. This topic is about personality traits, not medical conditions.

This statement is still true: "There's literally no context where attributing qualities to people based on their skin color is OK."

You wanted to be pedantic, so you ignored the context in which that statement was made. If you hadn't ignored the context, you would've known the statement was about personality traits and not medical conditions.