>"It can very well be true, though, that one government entity is not allowed to share personal data with another government entity."

It could be. But it also seems ridiculous and incompetent in this case. Both entities already know me, my address. And both know my vehicle, VIN, etc. One just knows an annual odometer reading that the other does not. Not like this is sensitive data or could be abused at that resolution.

I shouldn't assume the worst, but it APPEARS like they want to force people to try and be tracked.

I thought the UK uses kilometers

There was a book and a movie about face transplants

The word to describe that problem just eludes me at the moment

>"Annoying but actually reasonable"

It is absolutely reasonable in concept. But it might not be in practice. I have zero problem with paying for my actual EV mileage in some tax. My State decided it was going to collect it annually during registration renewal. Also reasonable. But they either charge an "average" mileage of ALL EV drivers (however they determine that), or force me to put an always-on tracking device in my car. And neither is reasonable. And my vehicle manual actually says that such devices should not be used/left in the OBD port.

My State already requires annual inspections. AND THE ODOMETER READING IS COLLECTED at each inspection and entered into a State Police system by the inspector for every vehicle. So they ALREADY KNOW my mileage. Their "average" is an order of magnitude more than I drive.

I Emailed and asked why I am going to be unfairly taxed for way, way, way more mileage than I drive when the data is right there, already being collected by the State. And I refuse to be tracked with a spyware device that sends location and behavior data. The response was "well, we don't have access to that data, it is on a different State system". OMG.

So a concept can be fair and reasonable in many ways, and then be totally unreasonable depending on how it is implemented.

>"EV's are still horrifically cheaper to run than an ICE vehicle by very large margins"

That depends on the gas price, electricity price, and efficiency of the vehicle. ICE will usually lose by a lot. But there are plenty of places where that gap is not "horrific", if the ICE vehicle is very efficient, gas prices are low, and electricity is not.

The summary omits that this is an OPTION, and won't replace other options. I have ZERO devices with 6Ghz (and I doubt I am alone), so it would make no sense to offer only 2.4/6.

What I don't understand is why it can't offer a triple-band hotspot (apparently not an option). Or just a 6Ghz or 5Ghz only option. So you will be forced to choose between 2.4/5 or 2.4/6. But since it is mostly personal use, I guess that is fine.

I do wish there was a power setting also shown and that they chose a low-power mode by default so these devices won't potentially interfere with congested WiFi infrastructure around them. As a personal device probably just giving access to your laptop or tablet right next to it, it should work fine with a low power output.

Judging by the mess of wires on our street in Central Europe, I think there has been wires strung here since before the change from BC to AD.

In practice, it's more likely that the best workers will use AI to become more productive, while carefully reviewing its work and correcting if needed
Yes, this will reduce the need for some poorer quality workers, but it's silly to believe that today's AI can operate unsupervised

Only once they realize it.

At least some of us get it.

There is no way to enforce age limits unless you require identification for a login or it is something built into the devices, themselves, that signal it is a minor and in lockdown mode. And since the latter seems to not be happening, the trend is to try and "age-wall login" more and more sites. And that requires ID. And that strips both adults and children of privacy.

I think the parents should be setting the age limits for what minors access, with recommendations made available by various sites and organizations.

I think you nailed it - because of Trump.

Yes, and I like to buy refurbished phones. It is usually easy to get a 1-2 year old phone, but if people don't change their phones as often, do I have to use a really old phone?

(The last one was an absolute steal, 1/4 the retail price after 18 months because of some cosmetic damage. Top of the line, most powerful phone I ever had by far.)

The onus should be on the parents and their agents to control and restrict any internet-connected devices that children have access to. Children should not have unrestricted access to the Internet, unless directly supervised by an adult. The end.

There aren't just "some" sites that are a problem. There are millions of them. Trying to control all sites and strip adults of their privacy is not an acceptable way to deal with the problem. A whitelist restrict is needed. It needs to be made socially unacceptable and shocking that a minor has full access to the Internet on any device, or to call/text/media to/from a stranger.

They need to put this energy into helping to make better/newer/easier lock-down tools for devices parents want to give to minors and leave everyone else alone.