The problem with this is that google is often the alternative and can be just as bad.
There's a documented case out there where during COVID, when doctor's offices were mostly shut down, where the parents ended up taking a picture of the baby's rash (yes, in that area), and emailing it to the doctor's office.

Somehow Google's automated child porn detection systems flagged this, it was reported to the police who opened an investigation, then closed the file when it was realized that: 1. It was sent to a pediatrician office, 2. Yes, baby had a rash, 3. It was COVID, so office working remotely. This worked long enough for the family to get the appropriate cream for the baby, but google also closed down the man's accounts and marked him as a nasty banned pedophile.
I never did hear if he got that resolved.

Very much not in the USA confirmed.

Okay, 50% of the battery is sort of true - though 60-70% can be standard. Charging doesn't typically slow because you've charged the battery 50% of it's capacity, it is because charging slows at around 80% total charge, depending on exact chemistry. IE it slows not after charging 50% in a single session, but upon reaching ~80% full.

10% to 80% is going to take longer than from 10% to 50%, but it will still be fast. It's just that that extra 30% isn't going to allow skipping the next charging station, so why bother?

As such, only needing 50% more charging sessions, is still possible. By math it'd actually be closer to 30%.

Now, if you look at an unladed truck with 500 miles range vs a 300 mile EV, that's where you start needing to stop a lot more often, but again, remember I'm advocating trucks be hybrids and cars going EV first.

No wonder they haven't cave to Trump's lawsuits about their Epstein articles. :-)

This guy either socially engineered his way through a line, analyzed a weakness in the line, or time-traveled from the '90's not realizing we've set up an incompetent but totalizing police-state control grid to interpose every tiny aspect of our lives.

To be fair, "pay on board" is less applicable to airplanes than trains because seatbelts are important in turbulence.

That said, the lack of capacity is widely acknowledged to be a feature of wildly incompetent management.

We just heard they've started a new project to rewrite the air traffic control system for the umpteenth time (and billions and billions later) to hopefully allow for more frequent landings and departures. I fear it won't be specified for AI-assist takeoffs and landings and will be obsolete before it's done.

Better make some more 8" floppies.

If that's what an independent agency is, then independent agencies are blatantly unconstitutional. "The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America" is literally the first sentence in Article II. If it is serving an executive function, then the executive branch "calls the shots."

More to the point, if one is interested in who/what won what award - for some reason - it's easier to simply wait until the next day and read an article about it online somewhere. Same goes for any performances that may be entertaining. Why waste X hours watching either linear or streaming, especially if it contains commercials/ads. Personally, while I can see a point for the actual awards - it's nice to be recognized by your peers for your efforts - I can't really see a point to a (live) show about them. Same goes for all the other award shows. /$0.02

Your mentioning having slow chargers at destinations, such as offices, is actually a potential solution to apartments being slow about installing charging capacity, or being too expensive about it.
Have people charge at work, not home, in such cases.
The workplace will probably want reasonable rates, many already cover parking for their employees, and with solar power ever expanding, daytime power might actually become cheaper than nighttime.
For areas with actual parking lots, imagine covering the lot with solar panels. Help keep cars cool and clean, not snow covered, etc... While charging them up.
Might not work as well in the extreme north, but not all of the USA is that far north.

I don't remember the last time I visited a gas station in the United States that didn't have pay at the pump available. I'm sure there are some janky stations out there, but not many.

Plus, at least in the USA, refueling one of our 300 mile ranged EVs is only maybe 50% more often than a gasoline vehicle - you don't want to go under 10% in a gasoline vehicle anyways, but while full is not a problem with ICE, with an EV you probably want to stick to around 80% most of the time to avoid the charging slowdown (upcoming tech may change this). 30% is probably closer. IE if you need to fill up 10 times with an ICE vehicle on a trip, with an EV it'd be 13 charging stops.

Plus or minus some accounting for placement of towns and charging/fuel stations.

That's only about 60 miles difference,

Tell Python programmers that white-space block delineation is dumb and braces are better. :-)

At which point, you're (basically) using C - again. Not saying that there's no benefit to Rust and its safe(er) sections, but being a good Rust programmer doesn't make you a good C programmer, which (I'm guessing) is what you need more of for the unsafe sections. Rewriting things in Rust for the sake of it probably hinges on the ratio or safe to unsafe code, where those are and how they're maintained.

Rewrites always carry the risk of new problems as well as old problems in new ways.

Just curious; was there a reason this coded needed to be rewritten or was it a failure to apply "if it's not broke, don't fix it?"

Or Michelle Obama tried to get kids to eat healthier and exercise more - and got roasted by some on The Right. (but they're cool with RFK, Jr and all of MAHA)

Republicans will fight for it - when a Democrat is in office. Note that I'm not declaring that Democrats are definitely better, but more that Republicans aren't thinking the statement below through. Congressional Republicans are okay abdicating their authority and responsibility now, under Trump, but probably not so much when they're no longer in power, especially if (when) they lose the House and Senate in 2026 and the White House in 2028.

Republicans aren't thinking ahead and may just have to suffer through learning what things like the following mean: "reap what you've sown", "good for the goose, good for the gander", "what goes around, comes around", etc...

I've said before that the upcoming bans were more aspirational than effective, placed far enough in the future that when things didn't go as rosy as predicted (which itself should be predictable), that they'd modify them.
Examples include:
1. Expanding the qualifying vehicles, like including HEVs in the same category as EVs
2. Pushing deadlines back
3. Lowering percentages.

It's good to have a second engine but it sure sounds like Gecko isn't long for this world.