My charger came with the car and I got a $600 installation stipend from the manufacturer. I paid $0 and waited a few weeks, during which time I just charged off an external 120/15 GFCI outlet overnight.

You can definitely find deals if you look. Not to mention many states have tax rebates and other incentives for installing EV chargers.

The real challenge is reworking 70 years worth of car-centric infrastructure that makes riding a bike a harrowing life threatening experience. This is coming from someone who bike-commuted for years in a relatively "bike friendly" city (for the US). Even so, we have little shrines of white bicycle frames shackled to sign posts and telephone poles all over the city to commemorate where bikers were killed.

Plastic companies invented the "give a hoot don't pollute" and "sad indian" campaigns to push environmental costs onto the individual when there was a danger of regulation limiting plastics in packaging. Oil and energy companies came up with marketing carbon footprint as a means of shifting responsibility for climate change onto the individual.

It's popular for services that run on a shared hosting model because it can be run as either a cgi processor or via mod_php. It gives you access to backend scripting and all you need is a shell account. That's becoming less relevant in the age of containerization and VPSes, but it still has a lot of inertia.

Most of those things are what I would expect to do when renting a vacation house via a handshake agreement in the days before Air BnB. Maybe not mop the floor, but dishes washed, trash taken out, beds stripped, and "broom clean" was all pretty standard. You are (supposed) to be renting someone's private home, not staying in a hotel with a full service maid. Leave it how you found it.

White women basically elected Trump in 2016, staying away from Clinton in droves and preferring Trump by a ~20 point margin. They still went for Trump over Harris 53-46 in '24 as well.

And what about something like No Man's Sky or Elite Dangerous. No idea what the server side of those games is like, but there is no ongoing subscription. However, it could still be legally problematic for the developer to release the server side component. Should games like that just be illegal to make?

Modern agents can just drive your browser via an extension and hand control over to you to solve the CAPTCHA. Once they have a token they can drive the browser through hundreds or thousands of interactions.

The game world can be so massive that you can't expect the average consumer's computer to have enough storage or RAM to be able to run the world model. E.g. Elite Dangerous.

Game companies don't always fully own all of the server tech that runs the game. Some or all of it could be licensed and not redistributable.

There are always going to be corner cases that make certain kinda of games illegal under any kind of "own it forever clause", particularly in the case of massive online games. The server side component required to play the game could contain licensed 3rd party software, IP, or media that the company that made the game has no right to redistribute or disclose to third parties. If a developer had to open source or even just release a binary blob of their server software when it was no longer profitable to run the game, they could be put in an impossible position where they were forced to violate licensing deals with middleware vendors or media licensing agreements to comply with the law.

Creating that kind of game would become such a massive liability that they would simply no longer get made. Maybe that is a trade off we want to make.

To be actually effective though that requires that the website know the CIDR of every VPN provider on the planet, which I doubt they do. Sure they can block the big ones that advertise on Youtube and podcasts, but there are plenty of others that are most likely flying under the radar. I'm running an OpenVPN endpoint, for example. They probably don't have my IP on their list. There's no magic "I'm coming from a VPN endpoint flag in TCP" that a VPN provider can set, and no privacy-respecting provider would if there was.

And why should one jurisdiction get to destroy the privacy of the rest of the internet so that their age restriction laws get to be enforced? Blocking VPNs is only necessary if you need to geolocate someone so you know if you need to check their ID. Take away the ID check and there is no need to block VPN as it buys you nothing in terms of blocking minors.

The only really "effective" measure that respects privacy is to label content, and then parents need to parent and, if necessary, only provide children with devices that are locked down and block inappropriate content. Or don't. There are multiple ways to raise a child.

It's not a person though, so that's a dumb argument. Hitting a rock with a hammer would be a crime if it was a person as well.

The police orders would have to be lawful and reasonable in the first place for refusing to follow them to be crime. Usually they attempt to illegally arrest you and then charge you with resisting arrest.

I agree, but until we have fully automated space communism ala Star Trek, people still need money to live, and sometimes delivery driver is the only job you can get. If a robot takes that job, you aren't eating.