Yeah I think it’s the money issue. The companies have more money making self driving cars. Specially since the incremental advancements make them more money on every new car sell.
While trains don’t have incremental advancements with sells associated with them. They have less training and incentives. But technology wise it is definitely easier to control speed 1D, while mostly looking at the front (maybe back) compared to the degree of control/sensors cars need.
But do you know how easy it is to have self driving train compared to self driving car? Because trains only need speed control. Honestly trains are already almost self driving and only needs human inputs occasionally.
\1 is group 1 which is inside (), so second part is repeated 2 or more times of 2 or more char.
You forgot empty line. Since first part is ^.?$ it’s one or zero of any character.
I’d like to say people don’t understand the difference between torturing animals vs just being curious about animals. Helping the live ones, but also looking at dead ones. Many children get bullied for that.
Sorry, I forgot about this. I meant to say any sane modern language that allows unicode should use the block specifications (for e.g. to determine the alphabets, numeric, symbols, alphanumeric unicodes, etc) for similar rules with ASCII. So that they don’t have to individually support each language.
I thought the most mode sane and modern language use the unicode block identification to determine something can be used in valid identifier or not. Like all the ‘numeric’ unicode characters can’t be at the beginning of identifier similar to how it can’t have ‘3var’.
So once your programming language supports unicode, it automatically will support any unicode language that has those particular blocks.
It doesn’t have cups? You should be able to install it and plasma’s ctrl+p should work with it.
Now think, patents are similar things but for with more money. And imagine if someone else had similar idea and made slightly similar website you go sue them coz you had the idea first.
I know it’s an edge case. But the edge case of having to pay more on taxes on increasing income existing for incomes close to poverty line seems counterproductive, doesn’t it?
That’s not how tax brackets should work. But sadly for last year’s state tax I came across it. [Example numbers] Previously I had 24,200 annual salary but zero tax as it was below 25,000. Even though personal deductions are 10,000, below 25 was considered too low to tax. This year, due to a mistake from employers I was paid for two weeks retroactively, now I have 25,300. Instead of taxing 300 above 25,000 the tax was for 15,300 after deduction. So I had to pay taxes which decreased the money below 25,000 which should not happen if income below 25,000 pays no tax.
And considering there might be things like not qualifying for financial assistance and other things when you cross 25,000 (again example numbers), the actual benefit of making slightly below that, is higher than making slightly above that…
So the system is putting a resistance to overcome poverty. Either you start making double of what you are making, or stay on your lane. Because trying to improve your situation by only a little is harmful.
The reality where people cannot afford $10-20 things. And the corporations just start charging those poor people interest.
It’s sad that I don’t know if you’re joking