Yup. and some meetings you people ask you a question so you legit need some time to think about what information you should look up before the meeting. Even if 95% of the time nobody asks you anything, you gotta take some time to think about the topic the meeting is on and whether there might be a question for you so you have the answer for that 5% of the time. But 100% of the time you have to stop and consider what the meeting is about beforehand for the 5% of the time there's an actual question.

Also when I know I have a meeting coming up, I don't want to get in too deep on something that takes a lot of focus.

It can be more than superficial. If you're restoring files from your old PC to your new one, it could make a mess of things if the user account is in a different path. Probably not a lot of people write scripts for their windows PC, but those could break.

Sure it would be a janky restore or janky script if it was explicitly specifying the path of the home directory instead of the environment variable. But environment variables have been janky in the past on windows, so it's best to just keep the paths as consistent as possible when migrating to a new system.

Kinda shit they just wouldn't prompt you for what you want your home director called tho.

Also, LOL at your email address.

Yeah if it were about security they'd check the version of HTTPS, SSL, TLS and all that stuff.

Ah, so you've got a mental block about October 7. Got it.

What about Brawndo? It's got electrolytes!

Another day, another thing for you to rage over, right? Gotta maintain that outrage or you might think about how horrible Hamas is.

The US wants stability in the Middle East to keep the oil flowing.

Even easier to rewrite history when someone is attacking something like Stonehenge. "Just a bunch of idiots that don't really care about the problem, they're just trying to get attention for themselves." And is that all that far from the truth? IT is 100% about getting attention the only thing that's debatable is whether it's attention for the cause or attention for themselves.

The problem isn't that people don't know global warming exists, the problem is they don't care. Sure, being an asshole gets you attention, but it doesn't influence anyone to help with a cause. So whatever their intent, these kinds of actions are just selfish attention seeking.

You're assuming unscrupulous companies wouldn't find another loophole or just pay a fine for going over the limit.

Don't get me wrong, Tesla is shit for helping with the loophole, but it's a degrees of bad kind of thing. Getting fossil fuel vehicles off the road does reduce carbon emissions, but Tesla was exaggerating their numbers. They should be punished for doing this, but doubling up their numbers only works if the number isn't zero.

But this is all getting away from the fact that damaging these vehicles has the net effect of people driving fossil fuel vehicles longer. It's a net harm to everyone.

Hey it's not my fault that you're not good at logic.

I can prove objectively that religion is bad for humanity. Can you do the same about atheism?

Sure... there's a very large number of people that were killed by atheists like Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot etc. There's a large enough sample size to objectively prove that when atheists are in power they are as bad (if not worse) than religious people in power.

That's more of a problem with how carbon credits are being regulated. Sure Tesla are being assholes for doing this, but it's a corporation, I don't expect them to be good guys.

But none of that changes the fact that some meathead buying a Cybertruck instead of the equivalent fossil fuel monstrosity is reducing CO2 emissions in a direct way. Spray paint the sign a Tesla corporate HQ, don't damage a vehicle which will only have the result of someone driving a fossil fuel vehicle a little longer while the damage is being fixed.