For major markets that’s actually rare, and usually not even because they under invested, they just didn’t quite get it.
Their actually successful strategy is to make an inferior product, sell it slightly cheaper, undermine the competition, then achieve near monopoly.
But your comment is of course funnier. 😋

The comment was:

Daily reminder that religion is a monstrous evil.

And you wrote:

Religion is not necessary…

That’s the definition of whataboutism.

Do note that religion only ever seems to be a problem when it’s conservative or authoritarian

Religions claim authority and are authoritarian by definition, religion is extremely harmful just by the fact that it preaches immortality. You also don’t need to be conservative to believe in faith healing. There may be few exceptions to the rule, but by far the most religions contain these harmful doctrines.

So are the settlers civilians? Or are they part of an invasion?
I tend towards the latter.

180 missiles is A LOT. It takes a very strong air defense to resist that.
It’s bigger than the biggest Russian missile attack on Ukraine! Where an attack by Russia with 158 missiles and drones combined caused 31 dead:
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-launches-massive-air-attack-ukraine-least-10-dead-kyiv-2023-12-29/
31 dead and drones are way easier to shoot down than missiles.

This looks to me like a very serious attempt by Iran to penetrate Israeli air defenses.

Because it is a legal question,

I don’t get it, you wrote: " it will stay supervised", even though we’ve seen numerous cases where it was not. It just doesn’t make sense, because it’s contrary to reality. Disregarding it is illegal. But because it’s illegal it would make sense to write it MUST stay supervised.
But then there’s the matter of Mercedes FSD that is actually legal!

If they have fired hundreds of missiles, it’s clearly an attempt to overwhelm Israeli air defense.
Of course assuming the reporting we receive is true.

Israel is a failed experiment.

Exactly, but more than that, they both ignore(d) testing, that showed it wasn’t safe!!!

I think you need to religiously hold an ideology to die or kill for it.
The only form of ideology that is always religious is religion.

Also your post is whataboutism.

Ideological cause.

Cause in the context above would probably be ideological. So the meaning is compared to other forms of ideology or other reasons for people to kill each other. Not natural disaster or diseases. Because obviously most people die from natural causes, and are not killed.

The original quote that was probably thought of is:
George Carlin: “More people have been killed in the name of God than for any other reason”

if your religion prohibits you from the practice of medicine, you are not allowed to have a hospital.

That should be obvious, but to the religious it’s apparently not.

Freedom of religion is an overused term, to allow special treatment for religion.
Religions should have no more rights than ideology, because they are nothing more.
They should have no more protection against discrimination than ideology, because they are nothing more.
That means a harmful religion can be banned, and it is NOT discrimination but civilization.
We have freedom of thought, but religion should not have priority or privileges over other types of thought.

If faith is all you have, you have less than nothing.

But it helps.

Freedom of religion my ass.
Religion is harmful and dangerous, and should absolutely be required to follow the law at the very minimum.
Otherwise it cannot be acknowledged in a civilized society. And should not only lose tax benefits, but be outlawed.

How is this downvoted? It’s a correct response to a false claim: "no matter what the underlying tech is. "
The post responded to is basically nonsensical.

Also this part:

As long as the “driver” is responsible in case of a crash and not the manufacturer of the car, it will stay supervised

If this was changed to “it must stay supervised” It would make more sense.

Mercedes, some states in USA.
But it’s only verified for day time, and on marked roads.
But that’s still better than Tesla.

Except it has been advertised as full self driving for about a decade now, and Elon Musk has even claimed it’s safer than a human driver, because it doesn’t lose concentration or attention.

The thing that is ILLEGALLY called Full Self Driving!
Because it’s not actually FSD, but ASSISTED something something driving.
Because calling it assisted full self driving is self contradictory, and should be illegal too.

deleted by creator