A foreign territory that israel is at the same time at war with, but also controls borders, imports/exports, airspace and the population registry.
Also, what about the West Bank? The PA is decisively not at war with Israel, yet the occupation there is even stricter than in Gaza. The Israeli government seems to view it as a Schrödinger's territory that at the same time is part of the state and not part of the state.
It's called disputed territory. That's the nature of disputed territory. South Korea doesn't owe North Korean citizens any rights while they are at war (since the 50s), for example, and claims the whole Korean peninsula.
It is wrong to say the PA is not at war with Israel. They currently have a cooperation agreement they are holding to. The PA still compensates any terrorists committing attacks against Israel and disputes Israel's sovereignty. The issue is not resolved as the implementation of the agreements at the Camp David accords were interrupted by the second intifada.
This is what is called an unresolved conflict. It is true that Israel has full military control. The reason the conflict is unresolved is because the Palestinians refuse to capitulate under any circumstances, and because despite all the claims to the contrary, Israel is actually unwilling to destroy, oppressively occupy, or perpetrate a genocide on the Palestinians.
Surely you know/understand that:
1. The minimum standard, even in the West, is not high enough.
2. The resources spent on the vanity projects and luxuries of the ultra wealthy could raise that minimum standard instead.
You say, "you'd be more upset if you have nothing" but that is the actual reality for people actually living here. Our system is extremely fickle and contrary to popular belief, does not directly reward hard work with success. I know many people that work very hard jobs, that make a tiny fraction of what probably the lowest earners on this forum make.
In the UK I don’t really agree. I think that the minimum standard is fine. I think that the common standard for workers is too low, but I don’t think that this exists as a result of resource distribution as such but rather regulation, basically the Government prevents building housing which is slightly different as a problem, the rich would do it but they aren’t allowed.
If we had enough housing to go around basically every other problem would be irrelevant.
I think the luxuries could do almost nothing to improve the minimum standard, which is dictated by national productivity and the efficiency of systems.
I think you could seize the assets from every billionaire in the US and you wouldn't be able to tell the difference in day to day life. It wouldn't create more housing or more health Care because production and supply is what limits availability.
Your billionaire is not using a million times more medical services or living in a million houses or eating a million hamburgers.
I don't think anyone's seriously suggesting people be held accountable for bugs which are ultimately accidents. But if you knowingly sign off on, oversea, or are otherwise directly responsible for the construction of software that you know has a good chance of killing people, then yes, there should be consequences for that.
You'll see the reporting is totally skewed (huge surprise). He identified certain low ranking military members being effectively thrown under the bus for small things, or things it's dubious they even did. While the Australian gov continues to protect the real psychos: special forces and the top brass.
Successive federal governments wanted to keep up appearances with the US, & kept them on station for too long. Oversight & discipline became frayed. Certain US special forces wouldn't work with them because of it.
The grunts were sacrificed to protect the top brass, but especially the politicians who looked the other way.
Particularly embarrassing to do otherwise when one (Ben Roberts-Smith) has already been given a Victoria Cross.
If you actually listen to an interview with him and not reporting about him, you'll see him explain that he identified some scape goats for prosecution the Australian military we're trying to throw under the bus for minor issues or straight up things they didn't do, while letting the real psychos like special forces off the hook entirely.
Humans are terrible drivers, and even the human brain's reasoning capability is still light years ahead of anything Tesla is capable of shipping.
The advantage of machines is not that they have better brains than humans, but that they have better senses than humans, which is an advantage that goes out the window when you obstinately refuse to use better sensors than merely cameras "because that's what humans use".
That hasn't been my experience in a self driving Tesla. Against a setting sun in stop and go traffic on the freeway it was far better able to sense the road than a human alone and I think it has a lot of redundancy as well as views into all directions.
The goal is to be better than, not equivalent to, humans-- right?
I work on a synthetic aperture radar system that is high-resolution enough to "see" the painted stripes on roads through fog and a thin layer of snow.
It's not for automotive use and would increase the price of every car by several hundred thousand dollars but a fusion of multi-spectrum sensors should be the direction we are headed-- not a minimally-viable mono-sensor system.
Its enough to be as good as a responsible human driver, but consistently. The AI is never going to be tired, distracted, angry, drunk, and so on. Drivers not bringing their A-game is probably the most common reason for accidents.
New automobiles are available for the same price they’ve always been.
For proof I offer the price of the 1969 Volkswagen Beetle, the least expensive new car for sale in the US market for almost its entire sales history: $1800. That’s for one with zero options. A rolling chassis with four seats and a motor.
That’s $16k today. Coincidentally the same price of the Nissan Versa or Mitsubishi Mirage: with backup camera, air conditioning, and airbags.
People don’t WANT the cheap cars, though.
I know the average price of a new car has exploded.
That is a conscious choice by the consumer.
When production of autonomous tech scales it won’t increase costs as much as people assume.
And a human with centimeter depth perception could drive far better. The goal of an autonomous car isn't to replicate human driving, it is to drive safely, accurately and in accordance to the laws.
This is extremely important to remember, especially when Tesla describe their neural net approach as being easily fine-tuned to different jurisdictions.
I’ve seen the “human-like” behaviour of FSD 12.x praised a lot by channels like this, particularly where the car is breaking the rules in a way they consider “normal”. And it’s a fair argument that predictable behaviour improves safety.
However, behaviour that is common in the US - like making a turn into a side street while a pedestrian is beginning to cross - would be considered exceptionally aggressive and reckless here in Australia. It’s a cultural difference I’ve adapted to when moving back and forth.
At the end of the day though, when I walk across a street, I don’t want to have to worry if Tesla has fine tuned their model correctly to match our local expectations of yielding. I’d rather they just followed the law as closely as possible - because that’s the most predictable behaviour of all.
The car sees as well as the driver does. Is that good enough for all circumstances? No, clearly not. But refusing to drive in situations that are unsafe for people too sounds like a feature, not a bug.
I mean, let's be blunt: the "LIDAR vs. cameras" debate has been settled at this point, and the fancy sensors lots. Of all the things one can complain about with FSD, sensor fidelity is not one. Teslas don't hit things. The problems remaining to be solved are in the planning regime: my car still misses turns at a rate somewhat higher than I do, usually because it's in the wrong lane (and that often because it thought that the backup in the turn lane was something it could go around).
