The one that suits your use-case.

Don't have any way to charge it? Get a hybrid.

Don't go on long road trips, or when you do, you're OK with waiting a bit? Get an electric.

Want to spend a fortune on petrol? Get a gas one.

Otherwise, get a PIH.

Pretty sure all it's being promoted for is that it will make ~10 people richer than any human being in history.

> What is "the Civil Rights and universal suffrage movement in the US" if not a continuation of the leftist politics that Roosevelt started

The CRM was bottom-up, with personalities like Malcolm X and MLK both scaring the shit out of the government, due to their ability to mobilize millions of people.

Did they win and make the other side illegal? No.

Did the dipshits they fought win and make them illegal? I'd say no to that, as well.

Handling these requests at whatever scale they operate is their responsibility.

Nobody held a gun to their head and forced them to take on all of their customers.

It is socially and in many cases legally forbidden to use cameras in many spaces.

The fact that the use of a camera is obvious is what makes it possible to sanction their inappropriate uses. With this piece of shit, it's not possible to tell at a glance that it is not being used, so we have to always assume that it's recording feature is being used.

The default usecase for it is socially and legally transgressive. That's what makes someone with a smartphone a normal person, while someone with these glasses an asshole.

---

If I'm in a store or a coffee shop, and there's someone wearing these glasses in it, I'll do the exact same thing as I would to someone conspicuously filming me with a camera - I'll ask staff to make that person put them away, or throw them out. For the same reason, anyone with them is not welcome in my home, nor any other space I have control over, and any establishment that welcomes people wearing them will not get any business from me.

It's only new if you are blind to post-WWII history.

In the western world alone, there was no shortage of incredibly vicious fights with communist/socialist groups in in post-war Europe (Most prominently in Italy and Greece), to say nothing of the various domestic decolonisation movements (The British and French governments were scared shitless of them), secessionist movements in Quebec, Spain, that entire thing in North Ireland (the understatement of the century), the Civil Rights and universal suffrage movement in the US, collapse of prominent dictatorships in Portugal and Spain...

State-threatening social upheaval is nothing new, we just have a particularly shitty flavour of it right now, as fascism and fascist-adjacent movements are currently waxing.

Most functioning democracies require more than 51% of a senate and six justices and a criminal head of state to completely unravel.

Meta and it's employees seem to have thought of a few.

Like, why on Earth would anyone tolerate someone in the same train car playing with a grenade?

What would be the cost of turning all those transit trips into car trips? Would rush hour start at 5 am and end at 10 pm?

- They are trivial to find, because they need a large, physical, business presence. This sort of trade doesn't happen under a highway overpass, or in an alley off 3rd.

- There are paper trails that point to them from any legitimate businesses upstream of them.

- Anyone lower in the criminal chain will happily flip on them.

Is argument over this an example of learned helplessness, a desire for society to do nothing and declare failure, or just arguing for the sake of contrarianism?

We have evidence of trying it with catalytic converters, and it worked. Catching every thief is hard. Catching one thief, and having them point to their fence is easy.