An incredibly tone-deaf choice of words just one day after her hot mic "sitting on their arses" comment.
theplanlessman
joined 2 years ago
Fun fact, most car advertising uses a computer generated car. Photoreal cars bave been achievable for years now and it just makes sense for them to do it as they can keep it looking flawless throughout the ad. There's even a "mocap" car with an adjustable body to match the length/width etc. of the car it's supposed to be that they can just pin the model to.
I don't think it would be up to us to decide if it is acceptable or not. We don't ask the cow if they think it's okay that we take their milk, their skin, their meat. Likewise, I doubt a more advanced alien species would bother asking for our permission if they decided they had a use for us.
On a more philosophical point though, there's also the matter of sentience. As far as we're aware the animals we use for food, labour, etc. don't have the mental capacity to really understand the situation they find themselves in. They can't process and understand the fact that they are being used. As we are a species that can, the chances that we'd let another species, even one more advanced than us, exploit us without resisting are probably pretty low.
I know we're dealing with human aliens, but there is actually a thing called takotsubo cardiomyopathy, also known as "broken heart syndrome", where your heart weakens as a result of emotional trauma.
It is rarely fatal, but deaths have occurred as a result of it.
One of those things is illegal, the other is not. One puts others at risk of injury and death, the other does not.
Not necessarily inventing laws, some may be applying their local laws to a video of a bike ride in a different jurisdiction.
I read it as being a riff off of "speed" cameras, which are obviously cameras triggered by speed and not cameras that capture the concept of speed on film.
Just went down the legislation.gov rabbit hole, and it seems there are regulations on headlight height and angle that have been in place since 1989, but unfortunately no maximum power or brightness restrictions.
Which means that although a driver could be fined for using excessively bright headlights, the manufacturer of the car could not be fined for making the car like that in the first place.
Perhaps if things like these noise cameras gain in popularity it will encourage the lawmakers to look at other issues like this one.
I really hoped that if nothing else, maybe the lockdowns would at least have taught us how much better it is in so many ways to not have as many cars on the road, but that seems not to be the case. It's certainly not helped by the fact that here in the UK bus services are being slashed left right and centre. And then we have the PM vocally supporting the pro-car movement...
Legally speaking filtering is fine for both bicycles and motorcycles in the UK. I imagine if someone is the type to get mad at a motorcyclist doing this then they'd probably get mad at a cyclist too.
I will say that there's a massive size disparity between the two, with motorbikes capable of weighing 400kg while the average road bike is closer to 10kg. I know which one I would be more nervous about when I see it weaving by me.
Modern petitions seem pointless at the best of times, but petitioning a private company seems particularly futile. They have zero obligation to even recognise the petition, let alone act on it.