Anyolduser

Tomato, to-illegal.

How the fuck do you think gas pumps work?

I'm done feeding the trolls.

Sure, but it's on the list.

If it saves even one human life it's worth switching to an alarm instead of immobilization, even if that means hundreds of breakaway cables get snapped by morons driving away from chargers.

1. It's about hitting electric cars, self driving or otherwise.

2. Cars can still move with punctured tires, at least far enough that a would-be robber or carjacker could get dragged a good distance.

3. You smash the window and open the door. Now the panicked driver is speeding away, leaving you high and dry or dragging you along.

Being able to completely immobilize a vehicle while keeping it intact is a criminal's wet dream. It's incumbent on car manufacturers to consider that while implementing safety features.

Pry bar to open the hatch, like I said.

And yes, today people are walking around with angle grinders to chop off catalytic converters.

The difference being that not being able to start the motor with the door open is only a problem if the driver was being attacked in a parking lot.

It's not too big of a leap to imagine a world where a person could immobilize a car at a red light with the plug cut off from a public charger. Wall up to a stopped car, open the hatch (maybe it needs a pry bar) and put the dummy plug in. Now the car is immobilized. Smash the driver side window and they're in business.

Sure, there are some safeguards that can be added like requiring a current to immobilize the vehicle, but it's far from the simplest or safest answer. Car manufacturers need to stop putting in hard limits and just use alarms instead. I bought a new Subaru that has collision detection standard. The hedge next to my driveway was overgrown, but I drove right through it. The car sounded an alarm and flashed a bunch of lights, but it didn't engage the brakes, I was able to blast through an obstacle that I knew was minor even though the car thought it was a threat. If a manufacturer feels compelled to add a safety system, it's possible to do so without taking control away from the driver.

That level of change took centuries and I still understand it.

The internet speeds up change to the point where we'll lose intelligibility.

Yep, real childish of me to insist that our goddamned primary communication protocols remain consistent because it would cut down on fun improvisation.

Yeah, I missed "to mean". Looks like at least one other guy did, too.

Sure, but Jesus Christ fucking up part of speech is a childish mistake to embrace. Maybe we shouldn't just go along with every fuckup people on Tic Tok lean into.

It is the proper usage.

Then your example should have been "this house is aesthetic". Aesthetic is being used as an adjective.

Saying "this house has a pleasing aesthetic" is correct. Aesthetic is being used as a noun. "Pleasing" is the adjective. While the aesthetic is not defined enough to your liking, it isn't being used as an adjective.

Use your original wording and replace the word "aesthetic" with the word "quality". "This house has a pleasing quality" is a proper sentence. Sure, there's ambiguity as to what that quality is (is it the shape of it? Is it the color? Perhaps the landscaping?), but it isn't grammatically incorrect.