At the end of the day the government does need some input from the most influential people but at the end of the day the thing they are sitting on has "advisory" in the title.

There should be a push/pull on private industry versus public regulation, that's kindof how it works, you need advocates and skeptics just the same, dogmatism is not an effective way to govern. When a regulator gets so pigeonholed into a certain way of thinking or gets boxed in by fear you get things like where the NRC is right now which is pretty paralyzed against being effective in half of it's job duties.

There was a story just last week about the "AI doomer" appointed to head of AI at NIST, I think striking a balance is a good way for the government which has a deserved reputation for being behind the 8-ball a bit, to get a foothold on the industry before it gets completely out of hand but at the same time it's in the nations interest to not stifle a huge economic growth area the USA currently dominates.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-p...

Why would Honda, who already operates a multi-billion dollar industry, who already operates 12 plants in the USA with favorable conditions in the states they do business in suddenly not want to build more factories in their second largest global sales region?

They have every incentive here to finish the factories, the factories make them money. I get cynicism in general but this is a case where the public and private incentives and goals are pretty well aligned.

Yeah the Japansese are all famously behind in BEV now. Ironically, I think in 5 years we are actually going to be impressed with how good American BEV's are, at least until the Japanse get their shit together. However their hybrids are top notch, especially Toyota.

- Inexpensive and no dealer markups (rules out hybrids and electrics)

There's a push to change dealer laws, this is legal issue more than anything. Companies want to sell direct but they can't many places.

- Great gas mileage in both short and long distances (rules out plugin hybrids and ICE cars)

Bro 2024 Prius has 40 battery and almost 600 total range. That's wild for what it costs. Hybrids are really good. BEV I would say if you can hold out another couple years theres some really decent things coming.

- Engaging/fun to drive (rules out most hybrids)

Nah, you can get sporty hybrids now. You should look at Toyata, some models including the Tacoma have a performance tuned hybrid system that prioritizes power over efficency in it's design. It basically acts as an electric turbo direct to the wheels.

- No anxiety about refueling/recharging (rules out electrics)

Again, time and infrastructure solves this. More charging stations, longer range cars. I mean if you are doing long road trips, a BEV aint for you. Cool. But for most people, they drive less than 100 miles 300+ days of the year.

- Practical (rules out electrics in certain situations, i.e., not possible to charge at home, etc.)

See above. Electrics are way more practical than gas though, think about it.

- Reliable (generally, electrics and plugin hybrids have not ranked as well in Consumer Reports)

The manufacturer still matters. Who makes the most reliable gas cars? Toyota/Lexus? Who makes the best hybrids? Toyota/Lexus. I have a CR sub and who's at the top of the list? Both types? Do i think fucking Dodge is going to make a good car whatever the drivetrain? Fuck no.

- Safe (some electrics have had major recalls, like the Chevy Bolt for fires and Cybertruck for accelerator pedal/trim issues)

Gotta show me safety out of the norm next to gas cars, not just that they are different. Per mile are theyworse than gas cars? Gas cars have tons of recalls, they just dont make the news....

Sorry, but like the other guy, these are kinda old hat arguments.

This is just semantics dome. How long do you want to be around car exhaust, from any car? Car exhaust is not compatible with living things. That's a downside.

Welcome to like, 80% of drivers. What's your point? A BEV is great for 80% of drivers? Fantastic.

lol, regardless of what you think of him is the quote wrong? Argue the point, not who said it. What if I told you your mom said it after we finished up last night? Doing that just says i don't have an answer.

Great, for the rest of us a car is transportation. So sorry you won't be able to buy a model 2035 gasoline car, you'll have to choose from a variety of enthusiast electric vehicles or an 80 year deep used market. I'm so mad I can't buy a fridge that uses 1950's Freon anymore. I'm gonna go pout and get a drink from my new R410 fridge which works 10 times better.

Bro, the Libertarians are over, they sold their soul in 2016 and it's done. It's obvious why the adults stay in charge, the edgy teenagers can continue vague threats online.

Guillotines over fucking electric cars, the fuck outta here.

This is sortof a case where the instability of the decision ends up making the decision just the same. Companies are likely on the fence about going all in on a non-NN pricing scheme when just like we are seeing here it could be re-implemented at any time. It's a bit of a risk until things settle out.

Did I fucking say that? You are making my point: Prop 13 is market distorting. If my property increases in value over 300% in 2 decades my property taxes go up proportionally. You don't like that? Support an LVT like I do. If we admit housing is a distorted market in need of heavier regulations: I AGREE!

Yeah sorry, you got priced out of the market. Sell your house, collect your million+ dollars and move on. Why do you deserve government protection because you made a good financial choice 30 years ago? You are already winning!

No, I want developers to pay fair market rates to people so they can buy land put more housing where it has demand because that's what we need In places like Los Angeles and other CA cities. The single family home owners protected by prop 13 are the ones protesting new developments.

Case in point:

https://la.urbanize.city/post/...

A town would rather keep a dirty power plant on the beach rather than build new denser developments, all at the behest of legacy homeowners.

Argument from emotion, show me in the constition your right to be protected from the economics, or where it says "you have a right to maintain a house at the same propert tax rate over decades"

This is state law, not federal. Housing is all state and local. Learn how things work.

Hybrids are good and every single manufacturer today offers them. In 2024 if I am shopping for a car I have options across all 3 ranges, pure ICE, Hybrid and BEV, what's the problem?

Fact is a lot of buyers like the idae of a BEV. It has a lot of inherent advantages for a good chunk of drivers if you have a place to charge (biggest challenge).

  They are less maintenance, have better performance, less noise, no smog, quieter, smoother, filled up every day from my home, cheaper to operate long term. It's a no brainer second car for any 2+ car households. The median commute is what, like 20-30 miles? Perfect case for BEV. The issue today is cost and infrastructure, all things solved in time. You are looking at today at declaring the state of the future is determined already, it's kinda silly honestly.

Doug DeMuro put it really well where he said the Model 3 is the perfect example of "car as an appliance", it does just basic commuting better than anything on the road today.

Is it? Are you talking about everyone having a DPF and Urea system in their cars just to use diesels?

Also we have the EV push in part because of fucking diesel-gate so your biggest proponents (VW) were the ones that effectively killed it's chances in the US>

All these arguments are like 10 years old no longer applicable. The public demand argument (it's there, cost is the issue currently) the materials issue (BEV's make up their carbon faster than an ICE car) sourcing (battery manufacturers are always knocking down the amount of cobalt and nickel. Part of why a lot of Teslas's are on lithium-phosphate(?) batteries instead of traditional lithium-ion. and a BEV still comes out ahead of an ICE car even if you charge it with nothing but coal power.

Get new arguments please.

Yeah we are getting there, we are in the transition as manufacturing capacity catches up, especially on the battery front. A lot of factories are currently under construction.

https://www.dadsdivorcelaw.com...

Myth: Fathers Almost Never Get Custody

It depends on the applicable definition of “never,” but generally, this is untrue. The most recent available Census statistics show that fathers represent around one in five custodial parents—an improvement over the 16 percent of custodial parents reported in 1994. However, studies indicate that dads simply do not ask for custody as often as mothers do, and courts generally do not award what is not asked for in that regard.

A Massachusetts study examined 2,100 fathers who asked for custody and pushed aggressively to win it. Of those 2,100, 92 percent either received full or joint custody, with mothers receiving full custody only 7 percent of the time. Another study where 8 percent of fathers asked for custody showed that of that 8 percent, 79 percent received either sole or joint custody (in other words, approximately 6.3 percent of all fathers in the study)

Of course, this leads to the obvious question: Why do so few men attempt to gain custody? While there are multiple factors at play, one to note is that since many men still believe that the court system is inherently prejudiced in favor of the mother, they do not try to seek sole or joint custody, believing it to be a waste of time and money. This contributes to any lingering biases or claims that men care less about their children, which is, in fact, mostly untrue.

This is a fair concern but nobody is pulling a conviction from a police report solely by itself for the same reasons of whether an AI or a human officer writes it, both are fallible and you will need corroboration. An officer testimony alone is generally not enough to convict someone of even just a parking ticket, they ahve to bring something else.

And again my way of going about this is that at the end of the day person responsible for the words on the report is the officer. If an AI writes it its their responsibility to confirm it's as accurate as what they would write by hand. If it's wrong they take responsibility. If an officer writes inaccurate reports by hand is that any better? I would need to see how accurate current reports are before I would say the system does a worse job.

Unless you are a person who is advocating (or in general complaining about or is concerned about) marrage and childbirth rates than that is part of the cost you have to accept if you want those numbers to go up. If you don't care about that then I am not really talking to you, status quo is fine, your perspective is intact.

I am talking to people who are like "we need more families" and also "i dont want to pay for anything" well, you cant get both, as they say "we live in a society". Just accept your falling 1st world birthrates and shut up about it already.

This is argument from emotion, the initial financial status of childcare workers is a non-sequitor so long as they are paid farily for doing the work. In America we also heavily lean on immigrant works for elder care positions as well, are we going to bring up their financial status? Nobody is asking these people to work for free so you are just trying to pull on some sort of heartstrings with that argument.

You want more kids born in America you will need subsidized daycare on top of lots of other wrap around child services and tax adjustments.

If you don't care about childbirth rates then don't change anything, rates will continue to fall naturally.

"i ant reading all that. im happy for you tho. or sorry that happened"

hey if you want to keep Prop 13 around go for it, but then let's not claim you or any of those homeowners believe in a "housing market" becuase it's not at that point so all your Prop 13 supports better stop nimby-ing it up over there and blocking housing developments and other works projects becuase, well, fuck you.

Aww your homes value skyrocketed in the past 30 years and now your taxes are twwoooooo high?!?! Well sorry thats how fucking markets work. Take your big fat house payment and move on, it's what someone would have to do in every other state in this country in that situation. Take your million dollars and retire and let the housing go to people who can afford it.

Also any prop 13 people have lived in the state for decades and voted for these things.

I didn't need the history lesson. Doesn't matter how it came to be, some laws go in and the outcomes are unforseen and bad. Bad laws are bad, we should kill bad laws and have good laws. Prop 13 is bad law. Or if you want to keep it I better not hear a peep about blocking public housing or dense development anymore.

Yeah that's a problem, the liability still has to be on the officer that those words are their words, however they got on the page. The AI getting it wrong is you getting it wrong.

Yeah I am curious about that too. If they do then this is probably good. But that leads to my next question, are police body cam logs not normally transcribed unless they need to be? Maybe if this allows them all to be transcribed, even if not as rigorous as human transcription might that be a good thing?

And this is why we can't have nice things, Prop 13 and other laws are definitely share in the reasons it has the housing crisis it does and to me is the plurality of California's problems, economically and politically, but people as you said are going to flip their top while digging themselves in a deeper hole.

Let me rephrase it this then maybe, it "shouldn't be a lot" for a state like California. Hell, they should be able to spend a bit more than that. The thing with spending like this is that it's not just money with no return, having plenty of reliable electricity and full EV infrastructure could very well produce well more than $20B in economic growth over those 10 years. If they can do something about the housing of course...