If you are parking in your garage, there's a decent chance you have a 240V for the dryer and could borrow it for charging.

The average city driver would be just fine with an EV, so long as they could just plug in at home (many can't).

I would love to get an EV but charging for me isn't that easy. It would require me to go out of my way more so then getting gas does. As soon as I can plug in overnight where I live, I'll be wanting an EV. Hopefully more models come out by then.

In the mean time, my hybrid that runs entirely on gas but gets me 50mpg will be fine. It's paid off, only has 83k miles and is perfect working order. Given the price of cars, I'm grateful.

What you can do is provide trained on-device models that apps like WhatsApp can use to recognize whether they need to flag content, and flags to indicate whether the user is a minor whose content should be checked by that model.

But yeah, global enforcement of viewing naked pictures is impossible, and global enforcement of taking naked pictures is also impossible unless you don't provide direct access to the camera (which would break a whole lot of apps in fundamental ways).

Having a no-photo phone option would be great for military contractors, who often work where cameras aren't allowed. And while having a camera with me all the time is kind of neat at some level, I also recognize that it has been psychologically unhealthy for a lot of young people — particularly those with body image problems. So requiring cell phone makers to offer camera-free options would actually make a lot of sense. Nudity is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to teens' use of camera phones.

And it would be way, way easier to remove the camera from a phone than to reliably recognize nude photos on a kid's device in a way that protects privacy reliably. It would also shift the decision to the time of purchase, where parents could decide whether their kids' phones should have cameras, rather than being a bloated, complex piece of software that takes up storage on everyone's devices for a feature that might be used on only a small percentage of devices.

So in every way, that seems like a smarter way to solve the problem, and also a much less narrowly focused solution that solves a bunch of other problems at the same time.

Food for thought.

And if you are a phone manufacturer and you tell them, "Our plan is to ignore your country until the next election, when your government will probably go away anyway," what then? Or if the answer is, "We can either keep England or California, and we choose California," what then?

Something like what they are asking for has to be done in a way that protects privacy all around, including, potentially, privacy of the minor from excessive intrusion by the parents, so you would have to allow an option for the kid to send the content to parents for approval.

For live photographs, that permission would have to be requested by the kid, and the content stored on device, but sequestered in such a way that the kid can't access it without parental approval. Otherwise, if you don't allow the photo to be taken at all, you wouldn't be able to have your kid take photos of art in museums without unlocking their devices (which would defeat the protection purposes), and if the phone automatically sends it for approval (rather than manually), you'd run the risk of kids' selfie porn getting automatically sent to their parents, making their parents potentially legally liable (not to mention probably psychologically scarred).

And all of this has to be done in such a way that none of the data can leave the device for any reason, under any circumstances, without the explicit permission of the owner of the device. That also means zero automatic reporting to anyone that content was flagged at all, because of the risk of such flagging triggering physical, emotional, or sexual abuse of the young people by others with access to those reports (e.g. pervy local law enforcement having a report of who all the bad girls are, or worse, getting access to the photos).

More importantly, this ideally should be done such in a way that it would be technically infeasible to comply with any future law mandating automatic reporting. And this is the truly hard part, because I have no idea how you'd pull that off. Mitigating the risk of future government overreach is actually the hardest aspect of this sort of detection from a privacy perspective, and given how many government officials are frothing at the mouth, breathlessly demanding such privacy violations, it's easy to see why such protection is so important.

Doing this right is potentially challenging to get right, and there are a lot of sharp edges. Worse, those sharp edges could cause regulatory problems in other countries, and because cell phones don't stay in one place, that can be a nasty problem.

Give them a ten-year implementation deadline with an eight-year design deadline. To be blunt, if England wanted this in six months, they should have asked in 2016.

If it were sometime else I might

Of course France did. Anything to weak England's global influence.

More like we saved Europe from speaking German. The Russians helped also.

I'm just spitballing here, but couldn't a more local LM be setup and trained on a more narrow basis? We're not talking audio/video generative AI but more along the lines of text generation with some sorting and organizing of files.

The doctor will still have to of course go over the output, but that might be faster then some of these people's input skills. They are doctors, not computer nerds. I've seen many hunt and peck on the keyboard. It would be a whole lot easier if a local computer station recorded the conversation and transcribed that into the medical notes and what not. The doctor then checks over it to make sure it's correct. Even if the doctor has to fix something, that sounds faster then watching some of them try and generate their own notes.

We need more then one AI working on this as well. You get one specifically to check the output from the generative AI (transcriber). It really doesn't seem all that far fetched. We could even get better notes with a bit more information then what we are getting now.

I realize the world is gloomy but there is still some hope that we can get some improvements out of all this as well.

This is Europe, where apparently the citizens want protected, apparently from anything.

We might be sing the start of Manufacturers telling the EU to go pound sand when they want total control over what their citizens see, and the manufactures just say "you aren't worth it."

Waiting for the troll mods.

Oh yes, it is real. My Mother in law got very nervous when her gas gauge hit 3/4.

But it is nothing new.

Perhaps when you learn to read, you'll be able to figure it out from all the explanations we've already given. You don't get to demand a repetition. Just learn to read.

Look, there's a dumbfuck now!

Somehow Europe REFUSING to pay its bills (let's remember that even Obama insisted they should - they simply ignored him) is the US's fault?

Yes, Trump destroyed the 'gentlemens agreement' that the US would pay for everything?

We apparently have different definitions of 'gentlemen'?

Spin up a LIVE based VM, with one of the more secure browsers. Then when you're done, all the cookies are poof ... gone.

This bypasses almost all forms of tracking/fingerprinting browsing systems.

Also, why can't hackers figure out how to poison cookies?