1. The vehicle is only at the preorder stage; they're not shipping any as best as I can ascertain. Pricing isn't listed, either.

2. The vehicle is only available as an SUV/Pickup. While the modular design has merit, there is no sedan available.

3. The website makes no claims regarding privacy, except in its privacy policy regarding the website. The closest indicator is the absence of an infotainment system, but that doesn't mean that it lacks a telemetry module; there is no specific indication that it lacks one.

4. If it's not shipping yet, it will likely still be subject to forthcoming laws regarding kill switches; they have made no claims to the contrary. ...So, while I would LOVE for Slate to be the starting point, and I'd even switch to an SUV form factor to get it AND pay double the cost of a Camry for it...I don't think it's really reasonable to have a "put your money where your mouth is" stance when the vehicle is not available for purchase, is only available in one form factor, and where the company makes no claim to lack a telemetry module. I'm open to a solution, but a Slate gives me zero confidence that it is, in fact, that solution.

That can be rectified.

Even on a stock Google Android phone, one can at least SOMEWHAT mitigate data collection by not-installing certain apps. To my knowledge, Meta doesn't get data if you don't install FB/IG/WA. Also, one could leave their phone at home and drive somewhere if tracking was undesirable; while by definition, one cannot avoid that if the car itself is doing the tracking. Even if tracking is unavoidable on the phone, 'airplane mode' can assist in certain contexts.

Also, crazy as this is, there are still 'dumb phones' that exist, which may still involve selling location data or call logs by the carrier, but don't have the sensors or software to do the level of tracking that stock smartphones do. Some people do opt to get those instead.

The fact that they're in vehicles, without buyers being meaningfully informed, where even customers who do opt out of data collection still get their data collected, and don't have an 'airplane mode' available to them...nor a simple "remove this fuse" stipulated in the manual to negate the telemetry parts at a hardware level, nor a manufacturer that specifically sells a 'no telemetry' model (one CAN get a Fairphone with LineageOS out of the box; I haven't found a 2025-model car sold in the US that is analogous). While mass transit in the EU might be the extreme-but-possible solution, that's simply not the case in the US outside of some metro areas, so car ownership is a necessity, even more than a smartphone is.

Smartphone tracking is bad, but there are solutions, even if they are hard. Vehicle tracking is worse, because it's way more expensive to get that wrong than getting a Graphene install wrong.

Screw immoral. They have been pushing for years now to move from media ownership to it being a license (and a non-transferable one at that). So let's treat it like that. If I own a book in whatever form (physical, digitally, or perhaps stored on an e-reader that is broken and no longer supported), that means I have a license which should morally permit me to format-shift, and own that book in whatever other format exists, read it on any device that is capable, and obtain it by any means that does not amount to actual theft, or constitute distribution (like Torrent).

Personally I buy a great many books on my Kobo reader, knowing that most of them will be gone if the service ever ends. Not a big deal. But books I need to reference, lend out, or plan on re-reading at some point, I will either buy them DRM-free, or get a physical copy. I do wish I could get an actual license for them, one that ensures that I can continue reading that book regardless of what happens to the publisher. Right now, that only applies to physical or DRM-free books.

Given the fake sources, the fake content, and the left-out content to bias articles along with the insane behavior by the entrenched, abusive "admins" who have [[WP:OWN]]ership complexes, Wikipedia is basically trash anyways...

...except for the 2015 version, every other version of Unreal Tournament can be spun up and made to work perfectly?

Same.

Also same...but something tells me that if Bitwarden were to do that, there would be a Vaultwarden fork the next day.

Even if there wasn't, browser-only access is annoying but serviceable, and it exports well enough to move to something else.

The concept of "god" is literally the dumbest fucking shit ever, designed to control the Inbred Trashyokels and Goatfuckers from 2-4000 years ago. We should have long moved away from that Cult Crap.

We had the Telecomm act and legal requirements for wired service for a reason. The cell networks have shirked this for too long.

Tell me you haven't bought a Windows PC in a while without telling me.

They ALL encrypt the drives by default or any user intervention. For home users, I *disable* it as part of the initial out-of-box setup, because Bitlocker is enabled by default and the key is uploaded to the Microsoft Account users are forced to use/create when doing the initial machine setup.

Now, the REAL fun is that Microsoft, in their infinite wisdom, decided that BIOS firmware updates are worth sending to users via Windows Update. Well, when those BIOS updates happen, they can sometimes trip the TPM in a way that requires the BitLocker key to be input in order to unlock the system. While MS will display the key's ID, it doesn't show the MS account it's tied to, so if a user forgot which e-mail address they happened to give during setup, or no longer have access to that account, the user loses access to their data because of a BIOS update that was probably either optional, or legitimately fixed a security vulnerability that required the laptop to be physically accessed in order to perform. 9 out of 10 laptop owners would absolutely prefer "a thief could potentially access my data if my laptop is stolen" over "i could lose my data if MS and HP decide to send an update"...keeping in mind users cannot opt out of updates, even to the extent of "update Windows, don't touch my BIOS".

So yeah, the story is legit; I have personally had to give people the bad news on this topic on more than one occasion, Pepperidge Farm remembers when BitLocker was a function Microsoft only included with Windows 7 Ultimate, but now it's enabled by default for home users with no meaningful awareness or consent given to do it.

Apparently, it's not ransomware when Microsoft does it.

It's only unethical if it 1) doesn't work or 2) is carried out involuntarily or without appropriate counseling, or without an actual diagnosis. Around here, that isn't the case (or at least it didn't use to be, things may have changed). People undergoing the procedure know full well what they are getting into, they are rigorously screened and diagnosed, and offered options (for some, counseling is enough, for others, hormone treatments without surgery). And given the low incidence of regret, and the generally improved quality of life following surgery, the conclusion must be that both the treatment and the screening work.

Other than the things I mentioned, how do you imagine that gender dysphoria is treated? It's no longer considered to be a mental disorder either, but something akin to being gay: it's all in the head, but it is innate to the person and not something that can be treated or "prayed away".

"It is worth noting that it is at least almost always comorbid with depression and anxiety, and transitioning does not alleviate those symptoms." Actually, it does, to varying degrees. And yes, surgical intervention for a mental disorder seems weird, but it's the best "cure" we have. People with gender dysphoria do not "grow out of it", and the incidence of regret for sex reassignment surgery is low. Very low. 0.1% or so, and to put that into perspective, that is 1/10th of the incidence of regret for knee surgery. At least it was before they started offering the surgery to people not diagnosed with gender dysphoria (and that is a condition almost impossible to accurately diagnose in children and adolescents, for instance)

The depression and anxiety often remain not because of disappointment after the transition, nor other internal issues, but by the acceptance (or lack of it) of transgenders by society. Thankfully that has improved by leaps and bounds: 30 years ago it was unheard of, 20 years ago it was awkward, 10 years ago something to be curious about. These days people hardly bat an eyelid.

Same...but the parents love it because they're cheap and easy to replace without data migration drama, and schools love 'em because of Google Classroom and Workspace functionality that Google gives to schools for peanuts while being checkbox compliant for bad-stuff-on-the-internet policies.

I'm grateful that I grew up learning to own my data...but I can appreciate that Google really made it seamless to not-worry about it.

Because automakers stopped giving car buyers some variant of the single-DIN/double-DIN dash cutout with standardized wire colors for a wire harness, so owners could put whatever they want into the dash if they didn't like the OEM offering. Carplay/AA was the loose successor to that; users had some agency with app selection, but GM has famously torpedoed that solution. Their arguments were so bad that it was almost transparent that they did it just so they could try and get subscription revenue from customers for functions Carplay provides out of the box.

Now, you might reasonably argue that a means of returning to user-replaceable infotainment head units is basically what you were getting at with "secure mount"...but my point is that these shouldn't be mutually exclusive. A stock stereo *should* have Carplay/AA, along with a means of replacing it if the user deems fit...but i do think it's reasonable to ask for both - base trims of econobox cars include Carplay; it shouldn't require aftermarket hardware to implement, and the owner shouldn't have to be stuck with a panhandling screen if they *don't* buy an aftermarket stereo.

Jensen Huang to college grads: "Run. Don't walk" toward AI

https://www.axios.com/2026/05/...

Nvidia founder and CEO Jensen Huang told graduates at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh yesterday that demand for AI infrastructure is creating a "once-in-a-generation opportunity to reindustrialize America and restore the nation's capacity to build."

Why it matters: With many college grads fearing AI could obliterate their career dreams, Huang pointed to boundless opportunity as a "new industry is being born. A new era of science and discovery is beginning ... I cannot imagine a more exciting time to begin your life's work."

Nvidia, which makes AI chips, is the world's most valuable company. Huang told 5,800 recipients of undergraduate and graduate degrees that the AI buildout will require plumbers, electricians, ironworkers, and builders for chip factories, data centers and advanced manufacturing facilities.

"No generation has entered the world with more powerful tools â" or greater opportunities â" than you," he said. "We are all standing at the same starting line. This is your moment to help shape what comes next. So run. Don't walk."

"Every major technological revolution in history created fear alongside opportunity," Huang added. "When society engages technology openly, responsibly, and optimistically, we expand human potential far more than we diminish it."

Full speech: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Because schools have been focused on "not-getting-sued", and to a lesser extent, "graph of standardized test scores go up and to the right", for a while now. In fairness, the outcomes we generally want - students with working-understandings of the world, life skills, problem solving, critical thinking, social awareness, self-awareness, and emotional stability - are all *very* difficult to quantify. It's even more difficult if we understand that every child has the same finish line, but different starting lines. So, we end up with the lowest-common-denominator of "effective and consistent regurgitation", which is simply the easiest thing to quantify and compare.

Well...that's because the real problem was both hard and easy to bury. Tech in the classroom works when it has a defined purpose, teacher training, tangential connections to existing curricula, and an underlying understanding of the principles the tech is intended to streamline.

Anyone who has ever seen a SmartBoard demo will attest to this - those demos are expressly designed to showcase exactly how new tech can supplement the teaching of old principles, and it looks *amazing* when the tech is shown in such a capacity. The problem is that the Smartboard salesmen can polish a 20 minute demo to a mirror shine, leaving teachers to figure out how to use the thing effectively in their classroom for six hours a day for 180 days...and it invariably ends up being used as a 'next-slide-button' for Powerpoints and an expensive projection screen for Youtube videos 95% of the time.

Tech in the classroom works well when there is an instructor expressly seeking to use it as an augment to existing lessons. Tech in the classroom stops working well when an admin signs a big check to a vendor, dumps a pile of Chromebooks and an instruction manual on a teacher's desk, and says "figure it out"...especially when it's paired with "you must use it".

Last piece of the puzzle: "it's what everyone else is doing" is a depressingly effective way to mitigate criticism and litigation.

Put it all together, and THAT's why everyone tried to do OLPC...and the backlash against it isn't necessarily stupid people sliding from "tech good" to "tech bad", so much as a group of average people - some smart, some dumb - saw the general shift of education in general, combined with sales demos and best-scenario case studies, gave it a shot, and now have their *own* data which indicates that the product being sold didn't yield the intended outcome, and responding accordingly.

This isn't a defense of the districts who pushed it, just the opposite - it's an indictment of the districts who could have avoided the whole problem before they burned millions of taxpayer dollars on a system with a fundamental flaw for which they did not adequately budget, and was obvious to any focus group of teachers and technologists who were given enough say to shoot down the proposal.