That's a reasonable argument for some situations. We've gone from range anxiety to charge anxiety: even in N. Europe with a fairly dense network of fast chargers, you may find lines at chargers during the holidays, when there are large groups of motorists on long journeys.

A Plug-in Hybrid may be a good option for people who have to make the occasional longer trip. Some models can do over 100km on the battery, which means that for typical users the vast majority of shopping trips and daily commutes will be done on the battery. Especially if they can recharge at work (which by the way, even here in Europe, is still pretty much non-existent)

Maybe it's just me, but I'm not feeling or seeing a great deal of excitement about the arrival of AI on our personal devices. I'm also at a loss about what the compelling use case is supposed to be. Of course there are coding assistants and AI-driven help desks, which are great, and the AI summary in Google search is becoming more useful, but outside of corporate (read: easily monetizable) applications, where is the killer app that warrants, the trillion dollar investments, and the terawatt data centers?

Which would raise some ethical concerns. LLMs are not sentient, not even one little bit, even if they appear that way. But a "brain in a vat" might become sentient. Does it get rights? Or is it relegated to a living hell, an eternity of figuring out which ad to best serve up next on thousands of streams?

Sounds to me the cameras are working just fine, but law enforcement is using them incorrectly (and there's no recourse or oversight).
The data should have cleared him as a suspect.

No. The average dash cam records to an SD card, the footage untouched until you need it in case of an accident, or for uploading amusing content to YT. Glassholes don't just record, they stream. To their own channel, and/or to the Meta mothership, for god knows what purpose. That footage is going to be analyzed, AI-ized and monetized 6 ways from Sunday.

Example: Microsoft shared personal details, emails and meeting minutes of Dutch regulatory officials with the US House of Representatives, under the CLOUD Act. MS (and a few other BSA members) supported the act when it was proposed. So now they can lie in the bed they made.

"Billionaires in the US only invest there because they pay next to no income tax. The consequence of that is that the middle class gradually disappears"
Yes, billionaires pay little to no income tax (or more accurately: capital gains tax or tax on dividend). Yes, the middle class is gradually disappearing. But no, one is not a consequence of the other. Taxing billionaires on realized gains is not going to bring in enough revenue to save the middle class. The middle class is not being squeezed out by taxes, but by corporations / private equity increasing prices on basic necessities. It's an odd application of the old communist tenet "from each according to their ability". If you are in the income group that can afford to pay €2 for a €1 item, they'll try and charge you €2 if they can get away with it. And if they can corner the market on a scarce item (or create that scarcity), they'll charge you even more.

"a country previously famous for it's scientists and mathematician"
A good many of them coming from Ukraine. They were a technology and engineering powerhouse even back in Soviet times.

Western media hardly report on any individual strike. What we can find about the strike on May 22nd: Russia claims the dormitory was used as a dormitory. Ukraine claims the place was used as an HQ for Rubicon (the Russian elite drone unit). No one has been able to confirm or debunk either claim.

So: 1) Russia is lying about what went on in that building, 2) Ukraine acted on incorrect intel, 3) Ukraine accidentally hit the wrong building, or 4) Ukraine deliberately targeted a student dorm.
1 and 2 are plausible. 3 not so much: their strikes are generally precise, and Russia allegedly had no jammers or air defense assets in the area that could have caused drones to go off-course (as does sometimes happen in other strikes elsewhere). 4 is implausible; Ukraine has not much of a history of deliberately targeting civilian homes.

You can use it as a living room gaming box; my wife uses it like that often. She uses it as a handheld when playing old arcade games on an emulator, but for more serious games she hooks up a big screen, keyboard and mouse in the living room.

Why do you think the Dutch authorities are now blocking the acquisition of Solvinity by some US based firm? Solvinity manages the servers for the national identity provider scheme (DigiD).
Personally I don't think the government should be using 3rd party clouds for anything remotely critical. They have the scale to make running their own infrastructure worthwhile financially, and the know-how to run it effectively.

Pragmatic? The decision was made at the very last minute despite the grave risks having been pointed out months ago. No action was taken. Now they unnecessarily blocked the takeover instead of taking actual pragmatic action. Such as: offering Solvinity to let the acquisition go through, if they are willing to end the contract for this service early, and sell the servers that are already living in a Dutch government-owned data center to a new partner willing to operate them.

"Competing with things in even higher orbits" is exactly what they are doing in this scenario. Round trip to a Starlink satellite with on-board AI compute is less than 100ms. Round trip with older satcom systems like BGAN to a base station is 700-1500ms. This in an environment where regular radio transmissions are highly unreliable, and putting the processor on board is not viable. As I said, it's a niche application, but a real one, and there may be others.

Low latency AI edge computing. There's several military applications, such as directing drone swarms or even providing AI to individual drones.

I'd be more than happy to invest in SpaceX, the space company. Sadly the company has been poisoned with X and xAI. Looking at the market valuations of each of those individual companies, that doesn't seem to be like a big deal at first glance. But in the IPO filing, the company points out that their addressable market opportunity isn't space, it is almost all AI. Around 3/4ths of their spending in Q1 has been on AI. If you buy into the SpaceX IPO, you're buying into an AI company. Maybe they want us to believe that they will be a vertically integrated AI provider with data centers in space. I am highly doubtful about the latter; there certainly are business cases for having AI datacenters in space, but they are edge cases.

Maybe few people will by enthusiastic to buy into that; even with investing into indices or EFTs, chances are that you're already overexposed to AI. The worrying thing is that SpaceX will be included into the Nasdaq 100 index shortly after their IPO. Doesn't that mean that anyone running EFTs or trackers on that index will have to buy SpaceX stock to cover their position?