You are, of course, trying to be sarcastic. However, the majority of people who shoot at cars are not trained marksmen. The majority of your body is indeed behind the door, not behind the window. Bullets from an untrained shooter are essentially randomly distributed.
In short, if I had to drive through Chicago at night, this is without a doubt one of the best consumer vehicles to do that in.
Why would you need a special car to drive through Chicago at night? There are almost 10 million people in Chicagoland. We don't hide in our houses at night.
randomly distributed means they'll hit you and the window with the same likelihood as any other part of your car. with your logic, it doesn't matter what car you get. you get shot anyway...
It’s very weird to me that science now equals vaccines and home-mandates, and it also equals advice given with little data. Science is way way bigger, and is an idea not a particular set of people or current beliefs. It also has brought untold value of taking us out of the dark ages but apparently that’s been normalized so much it’s no longer valued.
Yeah, but my phone on a vent mount works fine for that.
Usually on any trip that brushes up against usable range, I do the math kind of backwards. I know the distance for the trip, and know how much buffer I have. Then I just look at the trip distance elapsed, compared to the GOM, and if they are roughly 1:1 I know I’m trending well.
Can you get a temporary one that is revocable later? (Not an OpenAI user myself, but that would seem to be a way to lower the risk to acceptable levels)
You can create named API keys, and easily delete them. Unfortunately you can't seem to put spend limits on specific API keys.
If you're not using the API for serious stuff though it's not a big problem, as they moved to pre-paid billing recently. Mine was sitting on $0, so I just put in a few bucks to use with this site.
Seems like that's how we get Google, though. They've eliminated human error by eliminating humans who can make decisions. I can't say for certainty that's any better.
Pilot here - it's legal to fly at 12,500 in an unpressurized aircraft indefinitely. See https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-F.... Cabin pressurization is set to a lower altitude, but that's not for a legal requirement. It's just nicer to be at higher pressurization.
And, I mean, think about it - there are _towns_ at 9k+ feet.
In what way is the content of your comment strengthened by waving about a PPL? It serves only the patronize. Excise it, what does it change?
Similarly, assuming that most of the audience here, aviation knowledge or not is unaware that there are mountains with people.
Anyway, passenger cabins require 8,000 ft for normal operation, so it's a bit misleading to say there's no legal requirement. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/25.841. (And yes, I know the difference between airworthiness and operations, still misleading). Also why I'd bet a good sum you're a PPL.
I'm not even in the US; you're barking up the wrong tree. I apologize for disclosing a relevant fact. Won't happen again. Thanks for the link to CFR25.
Looks like a patent troll (it's not Kodak, it's "MONUMENT PEAK VENTURES, LLC") who thinks they have patents covering basically anything that uses computer vision segmentation.
MPV owns a portfolio of patents invented by the Eastman Kodak Company. Since
acquiring the Kodak portfolio, MPV has promoted adoption of technologies
claimed in Kodak portfolio and has entered into license agreements with over
thirty companies.
