I think the issue is very simple, the Waymo car drives based on its internal mapping, and the mapping says there is a stop light at a given intersection, and when Waymo encounters the missing stop light, it wasn't programmed to fall back and act as if it was a 4-way stop.

Remember, when stop lights go out, humans start driving erratically, with some thinking 4-way stops mean you yield to the driver on your right, some think it's the driver on the left, and others think it's whoever gets to their stop line first, and of course, the folks that just take off if they think they can get across the intersection.

There's a reason police officers are sent to four-way intersections when stop lights go out...

The requirement that there be a way to 'take over' the vehicle in case of a problem literally requires network access for a remote 'driver' to take over in case of a problem involving a 'driverless' vehicle.

How can a remote driver take over a vehicle's controls if there is no network?

The issue wasn't a loss of network access, it was the loss of stop lights at intersections:

Off the top of my head, I think the cars reacted sensibly. When the stop lights go out driver's negotiate amongst themselves about who will proceed thru the intersection, and with no driver to handle that negotiation, perhaps stopping is the correct response - other drivers can navigate around the car.

It might be preferable to navigate to the shoulder, but with other drivers swarming around the Waymo cars, they might effectively 'stuck' in the middle of the road.

How do you time-synch to the 60 hz line frequency?

You are describing a device that has a "line frequency" disciplined oscillator, and it makes sure every second is exactly one second long, one minute is 60 seconds long, every hour is exactly 60 minutes long, and so on, but the accuracy of the displayed time is contingent on the owner manually setting the time.

It's not that much of a change, though. The USA has only ever paid lip-service to its "allies" and always seen Europe as competitors. It's not a shift from "friend" to "enemy", just from "competitor" to "enemy".

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.

And raise the delivery fee to cover the higher wages you want drivers paid - if you want the driver to make $18/hr, then add in car costs, then add overhead/profit for the delivery service, and divide that by the estimated number of deliveries a driver can make in an hour - you could be looking at $10-12/delivery, with added fees if you are far from your restaurant...

The wages paid to the driver are YOUR responsibility, their pay is a function of the fees you pay.

My grandfather (a wealthy man that owned a large chain of successful regional restaurants) had the habit of tipping before being served, so the server knew to give good service. He was a good tipper and servers loved to see him come to their restaurant/bar.

Cherry-picked facts are always fun, I wonder how many of those workers were senior citizens supplementing their inadequate retirement savings with federal assistance?

If Walmart, McDonalds, etc all paid wages and offered each worker adequate hours such that they no longer qualified for SNAP, free school lunches, subsidized internet/cell service, Medicaid, etc then they would never be able to find sufficient workers.

I just saw an article where an employer said he'd no longer hire entry-level workers, they're just too expensive.

That's the issue in a nutshell.

Employers pay workers what they are worth, not what workers 'need', ideally. The incompetent (entry-level) worker has the same needs (rent, food, car, etc) as the expert worker, so should they both make the same wage? Of course not.

If it becomes illegal to pay a worker less than $18/hr, then jobs that aren't worth $18/hr will go away, and where will high school graduates with no discernible skills (yet, entry-level workers) learn those skills if they cost the employer just as much as a competent (experienced) worker?

Requiring a fast-food restaurant to pay a clerk $25/hr to stand at the counter to punch orders into a POS terminal will have the effect of eliminating that job, to be replaced by a kiosk. You may or may not prefer kiosks, but that counter worker was learning skills and good work habits, now where do they go?

It's not uncommon for waitstaff to be among the highest paid workers in a restaurant "depending on voluntary tips" isn't the purgatory you imagine for all wait staff...

Delivery services don't set food prices, this law only affects delivery services.

If we are going to start down the path of having to pay food delivery workers a 'living wage' and health insurance, then the days of online food delivery services are over since costs will sky-rocket.

I don't care myself, never used a food delivery service, wouldn't miss them if they were gone, but there are segments of the community whose lives were improved by having prepared meals delivered to apartments, dorms, offices, etc. so I see a reason to keep them around/viable.

Uh, there is a large, large population of people on this planet that are not directly or indirectly invested in the stock market - for starters, many Americans entire retirement "plan" relies on nothing more than social security. How many Indians are invested in the stock market? How Many Chinese citizens? Russians? See, there are literally billions and billions of people not invested in any stock market...

What kind of logic is that? We will artificially slow-down trading volume/speed to match what was possible 100 years ago because nobody thought they could make trades that fast? Do we have to hobble investors to the speed of manual traders on a trading floor because that was what the founders had in mind?

No. Let's not...

From the sub heading of the linked-to article:

and from TFS:

Seems like there are still quite a few solar projects going forward (not withdrawing their applications)