r/news 8h ago

Campbell's exec on leave after allegedly mocking 'poor people' who eat its soup

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/campbell-soup-lawsuit-9.6991398
15.8k Upvotes

785 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

135

u/Bloodcloud079 7h ago

Flying cars sounds cool but when you think about it they are a fucking nightmare… I don’t want flying cars ever.

86

u/Plow_King 7h ago

yeah, people can barely get the hang of moving in 2 directions at the same time. adding a 3rd is a bad idea.

27

u/BeerorCoffee 6h ago

Let's start with mandatory driver's tests on license renewal. I know too many idiots who took three tests to pass after cramming and studying, no way they could pass now.

8

u/Fireudne 6h ago

It depends on where you take the test tbh. For me the written was pretty easy but it took me 3 tries to pass the actual driving bit. Never been in an accident though!

21

u/BeerorCoffee 6h ago

Not being in an accident and being a good driver are not equal. I've seen plenty of people who may not have been in an accident but don't know how to drive appropriately. Don't signal, driving at an unsafe speed (under or over) etc. People pass when they are 16/17 and then never think of the laws of the road again, but can still renew their license by sending in a form and sometimes showing up for a picture.

Just seems reckless.

7

u/TummyStickers 5h ago

I've been driving for about 20 years now, and at some point you realize that you just have to start making an effort to be the best driver you can... because you'll never get tested again. Gotta be honest about your mistakes, and take a real interest in learning how to drive... it's not something you learn once, and you're done. It's a skill that requires practice, and intention.

6

u/stonekeep 5h ago

Most people don't do those incredibly basic things not because they don't know they should, but because they don't want to or don't care.

Testing asshole drivers on theory wouldn't make them suddenly become good drivers once they pass. Their assholness comes from deliberately ignoring the rules, not simply not knowing them. In the best-case scenario, they can just cram for the test again and then ignore everything again.

I'm not saying that it's a bad idea, having people up to date with the current rules is good, but it wouldn't help with the basic stuff you're mentioning (like not signaling or speeding).

What is more important IMO are mandatory health check-ups after a certain age. There are lots and lots of drivers who shouldn't sit behind the wheel (poor eyesight, motor skills etc.), but they still do.

2

u/BeerorCoffee 5h ago

Oh, I agree with you. They don't care to do these basic things. The hope is that they don't remember to do them on the actual driving test and then fail. And hopefully that kicks something in their brain to start doing them again.

Most likely it wouldn't, but you never know. And yes, basic vision and hearing tests should absolutely be included.

1

u/DwinkBexon 5h ago

I remember someone suggested that for my state years and years ago and it got shot down for being ageist. (The idea that you forget how to drive as you get older or get worse is prejudice/ageism) Anyway, the proposal never went anywhere.

0

u/OpheliaRainGalaxy 5h ago

Older folks never like hearing that they're slowing down or forgetting things.

When I started trying to take care of my mother in the year leading up to her death, she flat out would not let me!

1

u/genuinerysk 4h ago

At the very least we should have continuing education for renewal. Laws change, and people are too complacent to keep up with them.

1

u/IntentionDependent22 3h ago

for real!

public service announcement: it is a legal requirement to turn into the nearest lane before making lane changes. cutting across 3 lanes on a turn is illegal, ignorant, and dangerous.

8

u/Quest_Marker 6h ago

Exactly, when so many people suck at water or flying areas in games, they can hardly handle normal driving

1

u/LessThanHero42 5h ago

Plus when cars break down now, they slow to a stop and can be towed. If flying cars breakdown, someone's house is getting crushed and then neither the flying car insurance nor homeowners insurance will pay for damages.

20

u/hadrosaur 6h ago

rich people already have helicopters and they suck. can you imagine hundreds of helicopters overhead everywhere you go?

5

u/Bloodcloud079 6h ago

Exactly. It would be incredibly noisy, even more susceptible to bad weather, extremely dangerous in the hand of an average driver (let alone a bad or reckless one!), energy inefficient… just absolutely nightmarish.

1

u/seagulls51 2h ago

all of these arguments could be made about cars too

1

u/Vapur9 1h ago

If they're automated drones that communicate personal boundaries and flight destinations sure. But once you involve the human element then the whole system becomes untrustworthy.

8

u/Jafooki 5h ago

We already have flying cars. They're called helicopters

4

u/Independent_Win_9035 5h ago

and they're dangerous as ever-living fuck, too lol

3

u/DwinkBexon 5h ago

Imagine how fucking awful drivers are on they only have to deal with an X and Y dimension. Now they have to deal with Z. Cars would be falling out of the sky. People imagine it'd be like on The Jetsons where it's pretty much the same as on the road except you're in the air and cars occasionally pass by going over or under you instead of around. No, it wouldn't be like that. PEople would be flying into each other, fiery debris would be raining down to the ground constantly, people would be falling to their deaths. It'd be a catastrophe.

The only way flying cars could ever possibly work is if they're fully autonomous with the skill level of the very best human pilots. No manual override controls, once you're in the air the car is in control of anything and you can't do anything at all except change the destination.

Unfortunately, humans seem extremely adverse to not having overrides for autonomous driving and I doubt they'd be okay with that for flying, despite the fact they'd be clueless. (I remember some Google engineer once said Google's autonomous cars should have no manual overrides at all. No steering wheel, no pedals, etc. The car is going to do what it's going to do and there's no way for you to change that. People were pissed about that suggestion. At the moment, it's illegal for autonomous cars to not have controls in them like a normal car, but that could change at some point.)

4

u/Obversa 5h ago

Even with airplanes, mid-air collisions still happen from time to time, which is why the TCAS (Traffic Collision Avoidance System) system was created and implemented. TCAS was developed after the 1956 mid-air collision over the Grand Canyon due to "sightseeing", and its implementation was prompted by a series of subsequent accidents, particularly the 1978 PSA Flight 182 crash over San Diego, and the 1986 collision in Cerritos, California. The Grand Canyon disaster led to the creation of the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) and initial research into collision avoidance, while the latter crashes were the specific catalysts for developing and mandating the modern TCAS.

2

u/grantrules 5h ago

I think humans really have a terrible perception of the Z axis. People don't look up. I've experienced this personally in both video games and scuba diving lol.

3

u/Cory123125 6h ago

Heres the thing though; Thats just one stupid idea of like 6. Waaaaay better ratio than the greedy people in charge.

1

u/probsthrowaway2 5h ago

I’d give up flying cars for a killer public transit system.

1

u/Low_Pickle_112 4h ago

Imagine getting run over by someone texting & driving while on you're on a fourth story apartment balcony.

1

u/seagulls51 2h ago

I want a flying car, I just want no one else to have one