Cell phones and Smart phones actually spread pretty dang quick.

And we have a number of EV "product market fits". We have everything from the Nissan Leaf to the Cybertruck, for example. Do we need even more models? Probably.

But I'd argue that a single "Tesla Diner" is more a market test than a serious effort to spread the concept. Also, that just replacing gas station pumps with EV chargers also doesn't acknowledge the very real differences between charging vs refueling.

You're probably going to want more dwell time for charging.
I tend to generate a generic priority list for charging:
1. Home
2. Work
3. Convenient spot they already spend some time at
4. Inconvenient spot that they can at least find something else to do.
5. Inconvenient spot that they can't find something else to do in.

Worst case, businesses can always put in a couple EV chargers and check use. With solar power, there's actually arguments for increased daytime charging, so put in enough for employees + some percentage of customers. Check to see how often customers are using them. If it goes over some usage level, install more.
One can also figure that the chargers will have a lifetime - build enough to satisfy demand during that lifetime, maybe, figuring on assessing expansion options when time to replace the overall system comes up.

Slightly over half the population live in SFD and can thus be assumed to be able to charge at home. Even then, charging options at both apartments and work centers is expanding.

I'd argue that it isn't any more guesswork than building a new McDonalds or Chick-fil-a. Wawa is a known successful model. Heck, the one closest to me also has a line of Tesla chargers.

Doesn't need to be "spur of the moment". People get hungry, want food. Many older people also want out of the car for a while. Combining those two with the third - get the car charged back up, is effectively getting paid three times.
And yes, a few chargers at pretty much anyplace people park for a bit is a good idea.
Just consider the "expected stay duration"
Motels expect ~8 hours. So they're good with level-2 charging, but you're going to want enough to cover at least the percentage of the clients you expect to be in EVs.
Movie theaters ~2 hours. A low end level-3 DC charger is good here. Only issue is that you can expect them to show up in batches.
Sit down restaurants ~1 hour - basic superchargers.
Fast food - 30 minutes - modern superchargers
Convenience store - 5-15 minutes: The highest power superchargers.

Or even just a Wawa. They have the ability to do burgers and subs, even vegan options. Plenty of drinks and snackfood available. Fresh fruit even.

Question is, do they really have to be? We all know ISPs oversell their backhaul, for example. That gigabit connection won't be a gigabit if everybody in the area is trying to download at full speed at the same time.

Same deal with charging EVs, I think. Put more chargers in, preferably capable of full speed individually, but what are the odds that you'd get 80 cars in during the exact same 15 minutes? That every single one of them would be properly preconditioned for a full speed charge?

If you have a few cars that have been there for 10-15 minutes already, their charging rate slows down naturally, the station can coordinate with the cars and driver's plans to ensure that the power is divided up in a equitable fashion.

As for the solar panels over the parking - I know it's not going to make a huge dent in providing all the necessary energy for charging the cars, but putting a structure over the top to shield them from the sun and rain is still very nice, at which point they might as well be solar panels.

A station that has 80 charging spots but normally only sees 3 of them being used at a time might still be able to satisfy most of their demand via the solar panels.

I have to agree with thegarbz - I think it is highly unlikely for a supercharger station to experience perfectly steady demand. At this point Tesla should have plenty of multiple yearlong examples to figure out likely usage patterns.
I'd expect, given food establishment (but no breakfast?) to see peaks around lunch and dinner periods: 11 am to 2 pm, 5 pm to 8 pm. A trickle of cars otherwise. Add good breakfast, add a peak at 6 am to 9 am. (8am would be when the retirees mostly show up).

True Genius would take it a step or two past that. For example, it is a rare exception for somebody to be able to fuel an ICE at home, mostly restricted to a few farmers. But "most" EV owners can easily do so.

This means that the optimal recharging locations and optimal refueling stations are actually somewhat different. Especially if you go from ~5 minutes attended fueling to ~15 minutes unattended charging.

The latter gives businesses a much better opportunity to sell EV owners more stuff when they stop by for charging. It's why I figure that the "quick stop" gas stations with a microscopic building for smokes and drinks wouldn't be as popular as the expanded food options available at expanded gas stations like Wawa. Note: Not endorsing, just giving as an example.

Of course, I'm not going to give Elon/Tesla any "Genius" points for implementing something I was suggesting years ago. Back when a fullish charge was closer to an hour than 15 minutes, I felt that placing EV chargers next to restaurants made very good sense. Even today, while 15 minute charges are a bit fast for a sit down place, more suited for fast food or even a convenience store, the ability to either charge more fully or slowly to help conserve the battery might be good.

Do you realize you had an intrusive thought, wrote it down and started railing against something that nobody said? This is literally Trump Derangement Syndrome. Please, see a therapist. CBT does wonders for people in your situation. Don't suffer needlessly. It doesn't have to be like this.

They're not in the home gym business. They're in the data harvesting and selling business.

Your data is worth more than the profit margin on their exercise equipment.

This is the world now, and you cheered it on all the way.

Even Google won't allow you to watch random Youtube videos any more without "sign in to prove you're not a robot". Google, the original evil privacy rapist.

We got a solid ten years out of them before they went evil, I guess that's pretty good. LLMs are where Google used to be in the year 2000, an improvement on search engines that blow the existing products away. Remember how awful search engines used to be? Then Google delivered actual good results. Then they took away the + and - operators and started censoring politically inconvenient content by removing it or demoting it to page 137 of results.

It binds more strongly than O2 or CO2, but not permanently. Just time removed from the source will clear it. Providing supplemental O2 will speed that up while supporting life functions if they got a larger dose.
Basically, CO will win most fights with O2 for hemoglobin, but when it is experiencing a few hundred per trip through the lungs...

It could have also been a million dollar ransomware attack.

At last someone is willing to tell off the little people to their faces. It's heartening to see even in this day and age of open nullification of federal power in California and others that someone supports the US government. You tell those deplorables how it is! Speak truth to the powerless!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

I still have to ask what you're trying to argue. I mean, my argument is that Holodomor is a reason for Ukrainians to hate Russia, because Russia is responsible for it being as bad as it was.

That there haven't been a huge number of famines otherwise, continuing into modern times, isn't something I've argued.

That there was a famine that killed 3-5M Ukrainians less than a century ago, that might negatively affect the views Ukrainians have on Russians even before Russia invaded again, is what I figured relevant here.

The curriculum no longer teaches these dead white European men. In their place are Ibram X. Kendi and Gloria Steinem. Kids want to study scholars who look like them. Not pale, male and stale. "Sorry submitted by alternative_right. Oh , I see. Slashdot made the jump to full national socialist. Jew rape gangs, am I right? And Israel is racist apartheid state. Anything else to add,natzees? I thought your only book of philosophy besides the Bible was My Struggle by that failed Australian painter.

The last two big pushes for backdoors were under Clinton and Obama.

Looking, I'm not seeing much. Can you name a few cases so I can see what happened?
I'm actually seeing more exonorations because of DNA. I did find one case, but that was a police lab contaminating a sample by not properly cleaning equipment, not a DNA database problem.
I've read write-ups where they find a relative of a suspected offender in the DNA database, but in those cases the officers DID go for collaborative evidence. More DNA from more relatives, for example, to nail down the actual suspect.
For example, my dad found a relative via DNA testing, she was the result of an affair. Having DNA from multiple relatives allowed him to narrow down the possible father to two brothers. That is enough for a warrant, but probably not an arrest.
'Too many officers' isn't a problem I think we're anywhere near yet, more the wrong type as officers.

The police can screw anything up, of course, and prosecutors are sometimes little better. However, I'm not aware of any actual arrests based 'solely' or even mostly on a cosanguinity comparison. Instead, they use the cosanguity match along with other evidence to get a warrant for the suspect's DNA.
My dad, before he passed, got big into genealogy and ancestry. A 4% match, while a low percentage, is still enough to reliably indicate relationship. We have stenography systems that can still make a match with less remaining.
I've read some write-ups on what can happen. They get the initial hit of a possible cousin or such. They can then hit up other people in the family tree in many cases. The parents, a different cousin, it can all help nail down what section of the family tree the sample matches. Eventually they get it down to a person.
At this point, they generally haven't actually arrested anybody, but gotten a warrant for a DNA sample.
Haven't seen any cases where they both arrested and took somebody to trial without a direct DNA match.
As for bail - you do get bail money back if you pay the bail directly. It is a bail bond, where you pay a 3rd party to put up the bail money, that you don't get it back.
For what is generally a 'cold case', they don't arrest people willy-nilly.