I was actually wondering what would happen if you would just put a big rod of metal in 0 g and pushed it? If one end shifts 1 cm, how long would it take for the other end to also shift? Wouldn't that be instant? Well, apparently the signal would travel at the speed of sound. Which is weird, right? It makes sense but it's still weird.
Why wasn't I told about the new talking points? I though we agreed all new talking points will be shared during Monday meetings. I will have a word with Kevin about this.
In the last 20 years vastly more people climbed out of poverty in China than in USA. If that's your metric Chinese economy is doing amazing and USA has stagnated 20 years ago.
IMHO this comes down to how those features are sold and explained to drivers:
if Tesla expects drivers to read through the manual and understand how FSD and autopilot work in order to use them safely it's on Tesla. People simply don't do it (not for Tesla or any other cars) and you have to make sure your features are intuitive and easy to understand. If they are not you're doing it wrong
if this is explained clearly to people when they buy the car, there are warning messages and clear instructions and people still use them wrong it's on the drivers. There will always be stupid drivers, you should not disable new features just because 1% of drivers are too stupid to use them.
If someone thinks about playing lottery just tell them to bet on '1 2 3 4 5 6' (or whatever the number of numbers in your lottery). Once you realize this combination is as probable as any other the chances of winning seem a lot smaller.
You're soooo behind the schedule. That was the anti-EV talking point 5 years ago. You were supposed to move to 'but did they factor in the battery production??' (which they do) and now use one of 'but is the grid ready for so many EV?' or 'there are no EVs below $30.000'!!. You're welcome.
Each org is different. There are organizations doing agile in a shit way, there are organization that are shit because they don't do agile and there are some that do OK because they take out of agile just what they need. In my first job they would write all the requirements up front, agree the price, sign a contract and then discover crucial functionality was missing. So they could either deliver useless product and piss off the client or do some extra work for free. It was shit. In my next company everything was nicely divided into sprints but the process was so overgrown working there was super boring and most project didn't even finish, they just got cancelled somewhere in the middle. My current company mostly lets teams organize themselves and is using agile to monitor progress and react if something gets delayed. It's mostly fine. Agile is not the problem and it's not a universal fix. You simply have to be smart about which or it to use and how.
London would be in Central Europe.