Then you're not properly explaining the difference. Personally, after a point it is a distinction without difference.

There's a lot more that can sink a model than just that. Just being "ugly" can do it. Plus, competition is generally good, which means that you'll have 3-4 companies all competing for the same market segment (more or less), which tends to give customers better options at lower prices.

Well, of course, but it has its own benefits as well. You see, the existing pumps are part of the existing paradigm, and "most" gas stations aren't necessarily going to be all that supportive of it, at least for now.
For example, installing Tesla chargers might help the direct owner of a Shell Station franchise, but it isn't going to help Shell.
The complexities of this, combined with things like possibly needing serious power refits to supply the electricity necessary for charging, meant that at least initially, while Tesla was building its charging network to help it sell more cars, greenfield development was generally faster and easier.

I think that you're failing to account for new technology. Certainly, there will be those types out there, but the early adopters (who I will agree isn't going to be a 100% match for later adopters) are showing that most are perfectly willing to plug in most nights.
Even then, charging rates with a home charger are decent enough that if the driver notices they're at 20% - and the car should be warning them about that, they plug in overnight, and within 10 hours the car is at 80% or so, without the need to visit a faster charger and sit there waiting.
For longer trips, the software already takes the route into account and will plan the charging stops for you.

On restaurants - Yes, I kind of figure on them being for guests, used as an attraction for more customers.

Fair enough.

On gas stations - it might be better to rename them convenience stores, because that's actually how most of them make most of their money, gas is just a draw. that's why I figure that convenience stores will start shifting towards business models that assume a bit longer of a stop. Less "stop and go" and more "come in for a few!". IE rather than grabbing hot dogs off those roller things, you can get a burger or sub sandwich made to order. More seating. Etc...

Thing to remember is that gas stations actually close and open on a regular basis, as businesses. There's a lot of obviously ex-stations in my area. The newer places tend to have much bigger store parts attached, and yes, some of them have chargers. But I see the chargers closer to the highway than in the middle of the residential area of town.

I can certainly see this happening. in a bankruptcy, contracts can be violated and rewritten by the courts. Generally speaking, warranty and continuing service stuff are considered liabilities, little different than non-secured loans like credit card debt.
If the device owners are not on the ball, they can easily find themselves on the bottom of the debt pile to get anything at all, like continuing service or warranty work in a bankruptcy court.
Now, rewriting the firmware to *remove* offline functionality to force users into subscription models is, I believe, mostly untested in courts, though it might be illegal under EU law. Should certainly be illegal in my opinion.
Companies probably don't do it as standard because the expected class action lawsuit would cost more than the expected profit, even if they win.

Gen 1 iPhone was a single model, the equivalent would be the Tesla Model S, or maybe even the Tesla Roadster.
Tesla currently offers the S, X, Y, 3, and Cybertruck. Because Musk has a gradeschooler's humor. That's 5 model lines.
Ford Mach-E
Chevy Bolt and EUV
Rivian R1T and R1S
Lucid Air
Volkswagen ID.4 and ID.Buzz
Hyundai Ioniq 5
Kia EV6
BMW i4 and iX.
The above looks like a pretty good number even for cellphone models.

I'm not going to say that more models wouldn't be good, that we aren't in a pause because early adopter types have mostly been satisfied while the "main market" types haven't been convinced yet.

The idea that gas stations to chargers would be a 1:1 fit as opposed to something like "quite a few gas stations are good spots for EV charging as well, but not all"
IE gas stations would definitely be a spot to examine for EV charging, but they aren't going to be universally good, because there are differences between EV charging and gasoline refueling.

Not something I ever argued. Matter of fact, "check use" should imply that one is very much NOT forgetting about them, and keeping track of use.

I still don't quite understand how we managed to install so many chargers that break at the slightest excuse. Tesla builds dependable chargers, EU has apparently been installing dependable chargers, what's up here?

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.

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.

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.

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.

Okay, some thoughts on this:
1. The data has already been handed to the police. They've been using it to solve decades old rape cases and such.
2. Unless YOUR DNA turned up at a crime scene, it is unlikely that the police are going to arrest you over it. Unless you have an evil twin out there, it's not a very realistic problem.
3. The problem is also actually WORSE than you state. You see, YOU don't need to submit data to be found. In a number of the cases, a semi-distant relative, like a niece, submitted their DNA. This gave them a match with their suspect as a relative. So they go looking for family members who might have been in the appropriate area at the appropriate time. At least for now, only really used for rape and murder cases, where they're willing to expend a lot of funds to solve it. Between the relational DNA match and the location, they can often get a warrant for an actual DNA sample.

I've also seen video of where the suspect blew a 0.00 on the breath test and was promptly arrested for DUI despite it. Then a full test and workup at the police station, only for the police to have to release him because they found nothing. The teen was in high school sports and drug tested like every other week anyways. Of course, he ended up suing for stuff including the arrest after the 0.0 (what reasonable suspicion was there other than him being a snarky and somewhat cold teen?) and the police ended up giving him city money (because that doesn't affect the police budget at all) to go away.

I think it says something that despite the US invasion of Afghanistan, all the destruction and death of that, by reports most Afghanis still hate Russians more.

The US is "the assholes who don't understand us." Russia is "those fuckers"

Don't forget that one of the first actions after the failed lightening strike was to conscript pretty much every man they could out of the Donbass region (where the mistreatment was supposedly occurring) and send them to the front lines to largely get killed.

If Ukraine had been mistreating them at anything near that level, the region would have been depopulated long ago. Russia managed to kill more in the area in a year or so than Ukraine would have managed with its supposed "mistreatment" in centuries.