There is: your browser or other type of client does not know it can repeat a POST request if it fails, whereas a QUERY request can be freely repeated in case of errors.
One does not need to be able to create it themselves to evaluate if the output is correct. Consider for example that you can easily determine if a meal tastes delicious without being an expert chef, or the fact that NP problems are very difficult to solve but make for easily verifiable solutions.
You cannot deny that telling the entire world about this vulnerability before it is patched won't cause a lot of abuse that would not have happened otherwise.
>unless the label is something too low signal to predict
>Also, crashes are statistically rare events on arterial and local roads, so it can take years to accumulate sufficient data to establish a valid safety profile for a specific road segment.
I wouldn't be surprised if they did this to lower the support workload, since I have several 2.4Ghz devices that fail to connect to WiFi at all if I put both bands on the same SSID. I intentionally separated them for that reason and portable devices like phones know how to switch between multiple SSIDs based on signal strength anyway.
In my experience Chrome does not just load faster, but it also uses less memory than Firefox because of its more aggressive tab hibernation that is enabled by default.
On my laptop I had to switch from Firefox to Chrome because it kept filling up all of my RAM resulting in other applications crashing.