quote:
Originally posted by BRR:
quote:
Originally posted by mneeley490:
quote:
Originally posted by Red guy in a blue state:
My rule for pizza: No fish, no fruit.

You haven't lived, until you've had a bleu cheese and banana pizza with red sauce. Seriously, best thing I ate in Punta Cana.

I'm afraid I'm with PH on this one, mneeley490! Holy cow that sounds horrible. BUT, you've got good taste so I'd have to give you the benefit of the doubt and try it if I was there. However, it sounds wretched.


I figure whatever floats your boat - go ahead and put it on your pizza. I don't know if I'd like the blue cheese & banana combo but I woulnd't know for sure without trying it. Worst pizza I had was in Milan. I ordered it because it was the 'House Pizza' with, named after the restaurant so I figured it would be good and something different. It was different all right: chunks of hot dog weiners, yes hot dog weiners and a raw egg cracked over the middle of it just as it was being served, bleccch.
Ate the part with the weiners, cut around the raw egg in the middle, woof.
quote:
Originally posted by VinCentric:
Worst pizza I had was in Milan. It was different all right: chunks of hot dog weiners, yes hot dog weiners


I was in Montreal in 1982 and a group of us went out for pizza. I ordered cheese and sausage and got some funny looks. When the pizza came out, it was cut up hot dogs on a cheese pizza. It was not good...
quote:
Originally posted by thelostverse:
quote:
Originally posted by VinCentric:
Worst pizza I had was in Milan. It was different all right: chunks of hot dog weiners, yes hot dog weiners


I was in Montreal in 1982 and a group of us went out for pizza. I ordered cheese and sausage and got some funny looks. When the pizza came out, it was cut up hot dogs on a cheese pizza. It was not good...


Yuchh
quote:
Originally posted by BRR:
quote:
Originally posted by mneeley490:
quote:
Originally posted by Red guy in a blue state:
My rule for pizza: No fish, no fruit.

You haven't lived, until you've had a bleu cheese and banana pizza with red sauce. Seriously, best thing I ate in Punta Cana.

I'm afraid I'm with PH on this one, mneeley490! Holy cow that sounds horrible. BUT, you've got good taste so I'd have to give you the benefit of the doubt and try it if I was there. However, it sounds wretched.


Reminds of that old line about “Brave was the first man who ever ate an oyster.”
quote:
Originally posted by Seaquam:
quote:
Originally posted by BRR:
quote:
Originally posted by mneeley490:
quote:
Originally posted by Red guy in a blue state:
My rule for pizza: No fish, no fruit.

You haven't lived, until you've had a bleu cheese and banana pizza with red sauce. Seriously, best thing I ate in Punta Cana.

I'm afraid I'm with PH on this one, mneeley490! Holy cow that sounds horrible. BUT, you've got good taste so I'd have to give you the benefit of the doubt and try it if I was there. However, it sounds wretched.


Reminds of that old line about “Brave was the first man who ever ate an oyster.”

I guess it helped that almost everything else served there was uniformly bad. We survived for two weeks on rum, this pizza, and practically nothing else except fresh fruit and French cheeses that they flew in every couple days. Off resort wasn't much of an option. We had to hire a bodyguard to visit some local sites. I kid you not.
quote:
Originally posted by wine+art:
Self-driving Uber car kills pedestrian in Arizona.

Who is responsible assuming pedestrian was not at fault?


Obviously, it depends on the investigation. I am not going to quarrel with the given "assuming pedestrian not at fault"....
Was it a defect in design? did a part fail?
We'll have to wait and see.
quote:
Originally posted by jburman82:
According to reports she was crossing not at a crosswalk. If that's true, she will be found at fault.


I'll defer to the lawyers on this, but if a human driver hit a pedestrian who was not in a crosswalk, I'm pretty certain that this wouldn't absolve him of responsibility if he could have avoided the pedestrian.

PH
quote:
Originally posted by PurpleHaze:
quote:
Originally posted by jburman82:
According to reports she was crossing not at a crosswalk. If that's true, she will be found at fault.


I'll defer to the lawyers on this, but if a human driver hit a pedestrian who was not in a crosswalk, I'm pretty certain that this wouldn't absolve him of responsibility if he could have avoided the pedestrian.

PH

Yes.

It depends upon the laws of the state; but if it is a self-driving car in self-driving mode and there is no indication of malice, it is difficult to see a path towards criminal court. The facts of the case may also spare a civil trial, but not being in the crosswalk definitely would not be enough information to say without gathering other information.
quote:
Originally posted by winetarelli:
quote:
Originally posted by PurpleHaze:
quote:
Originally posted by jburman82:
According to reports she was crossing not at a crosswalk. If that's true, she will be found at fault.


I'll defer to the lawyers on this, but if a human driver hit a pedestrian who was not in a crosswalk, I'm pretty certain that this wouldn't absolve him of responsibility if he could have avoided the pedestrian.

PH

Yes.

It depends upon the laws of the state; but if it is a self-driving car in self-driving mode and there is no indication of malice, it is difficult to see a path towards criminal court. The facts of the case may also spare a civil trial, but not being in the crosswalk definitely would not be enough information to say without gathering other information.


Winetarelli is correct that the laws of different states are different. Arizona (I think this is where this took place) is a comparative fault jurisdiction. Thus, if the case went to a civil jury, the jury would be asked to determine what percentage responsibility the pedestrian had vs. what percentage responsibility the vehicle operator had (if it had an operator).
Then, there are two kinds of comparative fault states, and I don't know what Arizona is.
Depending on the factual finding, the pedestrian might recover and might not.
Suppose the vehicle was only 3 feet away when the pedestrian leapt out in front of it, and the vehicle was going 30 miles per hour. You can't stop instantly. At 30 miles per hour, you are going 44 feet per second. But, suppose the pedestrian walked out into the street and stood in the middle of the lane facing the oncoming car, and got there when the car was 500 feet away. Well, one would think the car would stop, whether operated by a human or a computer.

one thing I've learned in my 40 years as a lawyer. The facts of the cases are often important.
quote:
Originally posted by irwin:
The facts of the cases are often important.


Obviously we need to know a lot more about this particular incident.

To what standard is the self-driving car held in comparison to a human driver? Would the law in most states hold the responsible party for the self driven car to the same level as that of a reasonably competent human? Or to a higher level given the (usually) higher degree of automatic safety equipment in the autonomous vehicle? Complicated for sure.

PH
quote:
Originally posted by FL Wino:
Should be char able for driver that caused accident even if she did a no-no


Presume your word was supposed to be "Chargeable"? And the question is why? The person jaywalking (don't know many of the facts as Irwin pointed out) holds no culpability for their actions in your mind?
Worst pizza I ever had was my first night on my first time in Venice in 1983. Ordered a seafood pizza, since I was in Venice after all, and got a dry pizza shell slathered in olive oil with little bits of fish and shellfish more or less glued onto it with the olive oil. No cheese, no sauce, just pizza shell and seafood, nothing more. Shell was inedible and the seafood not much better. Cost me a bundle too when I was travelling on a very modest budget.
quote:
Originally posted by wine+art:
quote:
Originally posted by DoubleD:
Why would you order pizza in Venice?


We men do a lot of silly things in our 20’s. Wink


What w + a said. It was my first trip to Europe so what did I know? Plus I'd just gotten up from a long nap after an overnight train from Lubljana during which I must have been woken up 5 times for various reasons as I tried to sleep across 3 seats. (I think that's enough excuses for now.....)
quote:
Originally posted by irwin:
quote:
Originally posted by winetarelli:
quote:
Originally posted by PurpleHaze:
quote:
Originally posted by jburman82:
According to reports she was crossing not at a crosswalk. If that's true, she will be found at fault.


I'll defer to the lawyers on this, but if a human driver hit a pedestrian who was not in a crosswalk, I'm pretty certain that this wouldn't absolve him of responsibility if he could have avoided the pedestrian.

PH

Yes.

It depends upon the laws of the state; but if it is a self-driving car in self-driving mode and there is no indication of malice, it is difficult to see a path towards criminal court. The facts of the case may also spare a civil trial, but not being in the crosswalk definitely would not be enough information to say without gathering other information.


Winetarelli is correct that the laws of different states are different. Arizona (I think this is where this took place) is a comparative fault jurisdiction. Thus, if the case went to a civil jury, the jury would be asked to determine what percentage responsibility the pedestrian had vs. what percentage responsibility the vehicle operator had (if it had an operator).
Then, there are two kinds of comparative fault states, and I don't know what Arizona is.
Depending on the factual finding, the pedestrian might recover and might not.
Suppose the vehicle was only 3 feet away when the pedestrian leapt out in front of it, and the vehicle was going 30 miles per hour. You can't stop instantly. At 30 miles per hour, you are going 44 feet per second. But, suppose the pedestrian walked out into the street and stood in the middle of the lane facing the oncoming car, and got there when the car was 500 feet away. Well, one would think the car would stop, whether operated by a human or a computer.

one thing I've learned in my 40 years as a lawyer. The facts of the cases are often important.


Just watched the video that was released by the Tempe police. The woman was walking a bike across a dark four lane road at night (not at a crosswalk) and appeared out of nowhere from the car lights. The car did not appear to react, but I don't think an F1 car and driver could have avoided that crash. The video also shows the safety driver who was unable to react.
Stock market down 3% in a day and specific tariffs not even announced yet.

Nor of course are the counter-tariffs China, and those impacted by the steel and aluminum tariffs, will impose which will no doubt have an even greater impact on specific sectors.

I'd say something smart-assed like "Winning??" , but don't want to get into trouble, so I won't......
quote:
Originally posted by Jcocktosten:
Shocked that the market believes economic policy that is proven to be not only ineffective but actually harmful is not going to magically operate differently this time


Life without Gary Cohn. This coupled with a president that thinks the world is flat and has fired anyone that does not kiss his ass ( or worse) is just a sign of things to come.

A mental midget who knows nothing about the Hawley Smoot tariff or understands economics.
Ben Stein's character in Ferris Beuller's Day off:

In 1930, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, in an effort to alleviate the effects of the... Anyone? Anyone? ...the Great Depression, passed the... Anyone? Anyone? The tariff bill? The Hawley-Smoot Tariff Act? Which, anyone? Raised or lowered? ...raised tariffs, in an effort to collect more revenue for the federal government. Did it work? Anyone? Anyone know the effects? It did not work, and the United States sank deeper into the Great Depression. Today we have a similar debate over this. Anyone know what this is? Class? Anyone? Anyone? Anyone seen this before? The Laffer Curve. Anyone know what this says? It says that at this point on the revenue curve, you will get exactly the same amount of revenue as at this point. This is very controversial. Does anyone know what Vice President Bush called this in 1980? Anyone? Something-d-o-o economics. 'Voodoo' economics.
quote:
Originally posted by winetarelli:
quote:
Originally posted by patespo1:
Drink your good stuff soon, John Bolton is the new National Security Advisor


Scary dude.

Interesting that such a hawkish wannabe tough guy found a way to avoid active duty in Vietnam...
quote:
Originally posted by billhike:
quote:
Originally posted by winetarelli:
quote:
Originally posted by patespo1:
Drink your good stuff soon, John Bolton is the new National Security Advisor


Scary dude.

Interesting that such a hawkish wannabe tough guy found a way to avoid active duty in Vietnam...


Wait, are you talking about Bolton or the guy who hired him?
quote:
Originally posted by billhike:
quote:
Originally posted by winetarelli:
quote:
Originally posted by patespo1:
Drink your good stuff soon, John Bolton is the new National Security Advisor


Scary dude.

Interesting that such a hawkish wannabe tough guy found a way to avoid active duty in Vietnam...

"Paging, Dick Cheney!"

Add Reply

Likes (0)
×
×
×
×