Pika

I agree, I set my grandparents doors up on a timer, if its still open at 11 PM it auto closes both doors. I've got the ping a few times now saying "emergency door schedule activated" meaning that they were open and had not been closed prior.

I second this, just be sure to backup your settings if you upgrade, it likes to forget things on upgrades I've noticed.

I pick and choose my battles. Online? Sure. In a federal building with 700 other cameras that have already more than easily got my mugshot 20x over as soon as I entered, I'm just going to take the Convenience benefit. It's not going to change anything.

No, and it helps tremendously, if you leave and enter the country.

Like privacy wise it sucks but, I was the only one in my family that wasn't stopped for manual check at customs because I was already in the system

is it not possible to delete/turn off the user/boot password requirement all together and then save and reboot then try setting it again? I've never seen a mb that cared about user password entry, admin gave bios access and from there any setting was able

it worked for me

I don't think its a perpetual license if the company is allowed to cease and desist you for continuing to use the contract after the support window ended.

Dude, in today's world we're lucky if they stop at the manufacturer. I know of a few insurances that have contracts through major dealers and they just automatically get the data that's registered via the cars systems. That way they can make better decisions regarding people's car insurance.

Nowadays it's a red flag if you join a car insurance and they don't offer to give you a discount if you put something like drive pass on which logs you're driving because it probably means that your car is already getting that data to them.

This right here is another fault in regulation that eventually will catch up because Especially with level three where it's primarily the vehicle driving and the driver just gives periodic input It's not the driver that's in control most of the time. It's the vehicle so therefore It should not be the driver at fault

Honestly, I think everything up to level two should be drivers at fault because those levels require a constant driver's input. However, level three conditional driving and higher should be considered liability of the company unless the company can prove that the autonomous control, handed control back to the driver in a human-capable manner (i.e Not within the last second like Tesla currently does)

I think you might need to reread the rest of my comment, because I think we're on the same mentality.

I've read the article, and I read the last development update, which seemed to be leading in the direction that they had fully intended on making a project.

Their previous update is actually what made me have the mentality that I currently have, not the article you posted.

The previous update was a progress update saying that they were beginning internal testing and they released images of what looked to be a fairly progressed game. And they had seemed super hopeful for the future. That is not an update that screams this project's on the urge of being shut down.

I stand firm with what I said that this game would have had potential. And while they didn't make the greatest development decisions, I don't believe the choice to shutter the project was their choice. That's a lot of wasted effort for a team like that, and if they lasted this long the choice to close wasn't theirs.

It's just the bean counters didn't like how much it was costing for the game. So once again, what would have been a great addition to the gaming market was squandered due to greed.

This is also why the indie market is starting to take off as well as it is again. Because unlike big corporations and studios, if an indie game starts to show signs of maybe not making a bunch of money, they don't give a shit and they release the product anyway. Where if a large studio game starts to falter, the parent studio just shuts it down.

Furthermore, with the amount of telemetry that those cars have The company knows whether it was in self drive or not when it went onto the track. So the fact that they didn't go public saying it wasn't means that it was in self-drive mode and they want to save the PR face and liability.

I think that's the longest way I've ever seen of "Our parent studio decided this game isn't financially feasible and told us to stop".

This project is definitely a parent studio decided that they didn't like the game, so they decided to cancel it. Especially after Vintage Story proved that that type of game will sell, not at the metrics that a studio like Riot would want, but it would sell.

Judging by the graphics in it that they've released so far, it definitely looks like they were a good portion into development as well, which is a shame.