Find an independent EV specialist. They can probably get or build you an aftermarket LEAF pack with more modern guts.

There's a ton of aftermarket support out there.
=Smidge=

> Might be. But it is not far outside the window of actual expense

"Yeah the evidence is fake but that doesn't mean the conclusion is wrong."

That's basically politics in 2026 in a nutshell, I guess.
=Smidge=

Aside from the early LEAF packs being notoriously bad with degradation - both due to early tech AND bad thermal design - it's also worth noting that the main reasons EV batteries enter the secondary market is because the vehicle they were installed in got totaled.

=Smidge=

My guess is it was 7 different managers in 7 different divisions that all got together one day and decided to lay off people and use 7 different AIs and none did what they wanted. Just going by my experince working with Ford. We literally called them the 7 headed monster because they couldn't get management consensus and pulled us like 5 directions at once, and also bought in on every new technology before it was vetted.

The most important difference in all your examples is things like tooling and equipment are either strictly necessary to complete the job, or produce so much value in terms of productivity that they are worth the cost. Also, most tooling and equipment lasts longer than an AI token so the cost tends to get spread our over several jobs...

Using AI coding agents has not proven to increase quality or productivity in any meaningful way - increased volume of code does not mean productivity unless you're a middle manager. It's known that it is not strictly needed for the software engineer to do their job. You are not improving the engineer's workflow by mandating AI use, you're just making it more expensive.
=Smidge=

The cope has been nauseating.

It works. Everyone onboard now?

Now it's about how it scales and how we optimize use and lower release cycle time.

Everyone agonizing over token costs doesn't understand the exponential cost decay.. and how are you going to compete with hyperscalers who have essentially unlimited, near-free tokens.

Buckle up.

It's conspiring because those loopholes exist on the behest of the manufacturers to begin with. They didn't 'react' to the legislation, they helped in crafting it.

It's not even a 'take' - it's literally what happened. It's reality.
=Smidge=

> Meanwhile, that CAFE standards put in place by Bush and Obama mandated ever larger trucks and SUV

It absolutely did not.

The regulations had an exception for trucks and work vehicles. The auto industry then conspired to sell more trucks as high end personal vehicles in order to keep building vehicles without having to meet the regulatory requirements.

The lack of a small vehicle segment is entirely, 100% on the shoulders of auto manufacturers who desperately do not want to build them.
=Smidge=

The problem is you've always owned a license to use a copy of the media. The same thing goes for music. You DO NOT OWN THE GAME OR MUSIC. You literally have a licese to use it. The whole reason you can make a backup of physical media legally is because you have the right to make a backup of licensed media you own. You can even sell the backup copy if the original media is destroyed. I was telling that to someone recently, where a jewel case for a CD and orignial liner had a CD-R copy of the disk they bought.

I've worked in both music and computer science. Both literally have the same model. If you want to own the actual media, write a book. You literally own the book. In fact, publishing encryption software code into a book and mailing it to England got around the US's 40 bit encryption munitions laws, lol. Peoplle published RSA onto T-Shirts and lauded it as munitions. Fun times.

AP1000s run with a negative reactor coefficient. Translation, if they lose power they shut down, not melt down.

Not that I'm a fan, but they are still built on old (but proven) technology. The US was well on its way to a much better design in the Integral Fast Reactor, but killed it in 1994, mostly based on reasons the IFR designed to fix, like nuclear waste. The IFR was a fast reactor, meaning fast neutrons are used to breed fertile Uranium (U-238, aka nuclear waste) into fissile Plutonium-239 and then burning it in the reaction. With onsite reprocessing, (which is a proliferation risk, but let's be frank, all nuclear power is in some way) the remaining waste will decay to background in 100 years. Incidentally, that is about the same as fusion due to deuterium and tritium created by fusion.

Yes, and the bug is irrelevant. I use Squid to watch Netfix when I travel. No users that can sit on my network and intercept, password protected as well. I get close to 4000 Chinese hack attempts a day (usually Chinese, 1% North Korean, 1% American), none have gotten access. I give them fake access and troll them. which has gotten me in trouble with my ISP (DOS is kind of not allowed, lol).

You seem to have misunderstood.

The claim here is the battery cells are themselves 3D printed, not that they are stuffing already made cells into a 3D printed object. The batteries would not have to "fit in" the 3D print, they would be the 3D print.

So it's actually dumber than you thought.
=Smidge=

> So I already use a tool like this. It's called Voicy. I use it because I've been writing so many long prompts that I developed relatively severe tendonitis in my left arm.

Have you ever used a computer before LLMs became a thing?

If yes, how did you manage to not hurt yourself before your life was nothing but writing prompts?

(Maybe the solution is to stop writing prompts and go back to doing what you did before, is what I'm suggesting)
=Smidge=

> And what happens is that in the next budget cycle, they say, "Hey, there's all this money over here. We don't need to fund that anymore. And now there's a shortfall again.

I do not know how to parse this sentence.

This isn't intended or designed for ongoing funding. This doesn't factor into the state budget. It's a completely separate fund specifically to shore up health care and education systems that have been neglected due to recent/chronic underfunding. None of this impacts their normal operating budgets year over year,

The best analogy I can think of is a bond. When the government wants to raise money for a project or investment in the future, they will often issue and sell bonds to raise that money. Bonds mature and pay back with some interest, and are not recurring or factored into the normal budgeting. This is functionally the same thing, except instead of borrowing via bonds and paying back with interest it's just a straight up tax on billionaires.

> Absent actual, careful reduction of wasteful spending

I'm willing to bet that there's far less "wasteful spending" than you think there is, and it's just a matter of you not understanding what is being paid for and why. See also: DOGE "savings" and how we're suffering the consequences of cutting "wasteful" spending on programs that were actually really important but not in obvious ways.
=Smidge=

> You both can't be correct.

We can be, because shortfalls and deficit spending are not the same thing.

The new CA budget for this year is, reportedly, balanced. $0 deficit.

But $0 deficit this year does not magically erase the past several years of falling behind due to insufficient funding, e.g. shortfalls. This is why it's a one-time tax, and why I described is as a catch-up. I say "over the next few years" because the tax is expected to raise about $100B but only $25B/year can be withdrawn.

The full text of the bill is linked in the article summary, by the way.
=Smidge=