Well everyone here on Lemmy is full of shit, so there’s a lot of experience you can tap into if you need help.

I think the right to face your accuser is probably the biggest one.

As far as the lack of feedback goes, I can say having driven in Europe plenty of times that the cameras are extremely effective in getting drivers to obey the speed limits, but it’s not the cameras themselves - the the knowledge thay they exist. Entering a 10km stretch of road that has signs posted everywhere saying “average speed zone next 10km” or something like that, where they snap a picture record the time of you entering the zone, then a picture and record of the time when you exit it and calculate your average speed. I’ve seen 5 lane wide roads full of cars just chugging along at 2km under the target posted speed. So for that I will say they are extremely effective at maintaining large numbers of cars at safe speeds.

Once the cameras have existed long enough, everyone knows they work, because everyone has gotten a ticket in the mail. That’s when the posted signs of “camera ahead” really work. You’ve played the game before and lost, so every future opportunity will now have a giant red flag on it in each person’s mind.

Yeah, probably “Aab”.

Need help with anything else?

In the US speed cameras are viewed as revenue generating devices, instead of devices meant to protect the public safety. So most places have laws against them because the voters see it as “you just want to charge me for speeding” instead of “people breaking the speed limit are unsafe and need to be stopped”. So instead speeding is mostly enforced by actual police on the road (or pulled slightly off the road) using radar guns. The idea being if you were speeding enough to make a policeman bother to turn the siren on, track you down, and issue the ticket, you must have been doing something pretty unsafe.

I’ve wanted to do a full 4 leaf clover before. But unfortunately the one my by house in college was just a 2 leaf on the northbound side. The southbound side was regular ramps.

I did take the two leaves in one go though. I was headed out and after I got on the first loop I realized I forgot something at home, so I stayed on and took the second loop to go back and pick it up.

Well the answer now is 0. That round about isn’t a roundabout anymore.

I think Sony wants out of the physical console market. They just don’t know how to do it. The consoles are sold at a loss, but the games sales are massive returns on investments.

If they can double their sales by releasing on steam at the cost of 30% per sale, they still come out ahead, and can save all the R&D cost on developing a physical console, plus the loss from each individual console sale.

More wheels!

Ain’t got legs

Don’t know how to use 'em

We are all bacteria on this blessed day.

Non

So you need a driving license to move in the UK?

You listed all new item purchase things, where delivery is just part of the price you paid for it in the first place.

What do you do when you’re not purchasing something, i.e hauling shit you already own from your old place to your new place when moving?

Somehow, Palpatine returned.

In the positive direction yeah.

I imagine a sports car and a Nissan Xterra have about the same negative acceleration when running into a concrete wall.

You’re doing God’s work.

Then that’s not faith.

Its okay. You can say that.

You can also say “well my definition of faith isn’t the same as what everyone else’s definition of faith is, and my definition of faith allows me not be faithful to my previous faith and change my faith beliefs whenever I choose”. That’s fine. Just don’t expect everyone else to have the same definition.

Great. Again though, that’s about as useful as saying you have faith that the number 1 exists.

The question of whether it’s the mass that causes the force, or the force that causes the mass, or even if is a force in the first place are all open questions. It can be modeled as a force tied to the proportionality of the masses involved and their distance separated. It can also be modeled as a warping of spacetime, where objects moving closer to each other over time is just the result of of objects moving in straight lines through a curved spacetime. Whether it’s a force or not is a question of if it can be modeled to have a force carrying particle as part of the standard model, just like we have the photon for the electromagnetic force, the W and Z bosons for the weak force, and the gluon for the strong force.

If you have faith in any of those interpretations, it means you’re ignoring observational evidence supporting any other interpretations, which is just bad science.

Faith is “complete trust or confidence in someone or something”. Gravity is essentially a statement of a physical phenomena where things with mass are attracted to other things with mass. You can have faith in that physical phenomena, but that is no more useful than having faith that the number 1 exists. It just is, whether or not you believe it.

Then there’s Newton’s theory of gravity, which exists as a mathematical model of gravity, where the force of attraction of gravity can be modeled as a proportion of their masses. That works great in certain cases but break down elsewhere, and not until Einstein’s General Relativity did we have a model that more accurately explained other things about gravity such that time itself behaves different around different sized masses, and also the speed of those masses has an effect on the way that they experience time, and changes in gravity take time to be communicated with other things that can experience that gravity: they are not instantaneous. Time matters. None of that is covered in Newton’s model.

So, if you have faith in gravity, what do you have faith in? Newton’s model, or Einstein’s Model? If you have ‘faith’ then you have completely trust or confidence, by the definition of faith. So if you have complete confidence in Newton’s model, you’re wrong. Newton’s model doesn’t accurately explain many of the gravitation things we can observe. So say you want to change your mind and don’t want to ‘believe’ in Newton’s model anymore. You’re a follower of Einstein now, because his model is better. Well that means you didn’t actually have ‘faith’ in Newton’s model in the first place. You didn’t have complete trust or confidence.

When people talk about faith having no place in science, this is what they mean. Believing one thing to be true does not matter. All that matters is which model fits the evidence the best. And which model best fits will change over time. So a good scientist should change as well.

thinking I was being profound while just spouting garbledygoop

This comment included?