Weekend fun car would be the summer car.
Remember, the winter car is used for dirty tasks even in the summer.

The myth that AI data centers are using up all the water comes from some incorrect citations that have then swept through sensationalist and poorly fact-checked (looking at you Washington Post) news stories. One major contributor was Karen Hat's "Empire of AI" which overstated the usage by three orders of magnitude. (She did publicly correct that, but you can guess how many people are interested in the non-sensational numbers).

For proportion, California almond growers use 90x the fresh water of all US data centers combined.

Which is not to say that a data center can't still be a strain for some communities, but not in a more extraordinary way than e.g. the local university wanting to maintain a golf course.

But "AI IS SUCKING UP ALL THE WATER PEOPLE NEED TO SURVIVE!!!" is a wonderfully concrete - if completely false - complaint for people uneasy about the recent advances in technology to latch onto

So this has nothing to do with the building being a "data center" at all. The water used if for construction and it could just as well be a stadium or an apartment complex. But since people are talking about data centers using water we'll take any opportunity to jump in on that even if it's amplifying a misconception by mentioning it in adjacency to unrelated events.

You do have people doing that in the UK, but it is more people with million pound incomes.
I also lived in the midwest and never had seasonal cars. Now I have a car and a truck. I drive the car unless I need the truck.

In this case, the prime manager, the mayor, had just been replaced inthe election.

Actually, management was blamed left and right, the audit helped force the contracting companies to eat far more of the cost, etc...
Trick i failed to mention, it was the NEW incoming mayor that ordered the audit, and less than 1% of project cost to date.

I looked at a waterfall project where the mayor ended up spending $3M to have an audit done on the current state of a project that was way behind on time and way over budget, only for them to come back and say that it'd be cheaper to burn all the effort to date and start fresh.

Can you answer the question of why he would lie about either exactly? What is his sourced motivation? How does that stack against his incentive to not blithely throw away his career as an accomplished academic?

The actual explanation is much simpler. He is a world-reknown biologist, not a computer scientist or philosopher. He sounds dumb talking about what he is not an expert in.

You (I assume) have some developed expertise in the AI tooling. You (quite obviously) do not have any expertise in biology, or even the context of Dawkins statements you are alluding to, so you sound at least as dumb characterizing what he has said as "anti-trans crap."

They arent selling the product, most likely, a reseller or importer is.
With zero presence in country, they use a 3rd party for shipping, it is basically impossible to go after them.
Think like a small time comic artist selling art getting a commission and mailing it to the country of the buyer, only to find out that the art was 'illegal'.
Thus the go after amazon thing, because they are the enabling party inside the USA.
Another issue is jailbreaking the bikes.
A bike that can do the legal limits with a 200 pound adult on it can do quite a bit more with the limiters removed and a kid only weighing 100 on it.

Five day drive? Wow, I drove from Alaska to Florida in that timeframe.
No, it wouldn't increase it to 7 days, and would only increase it to six if you also substantially decreased driving time.
As for stopping at a dog park - that's why they're installing chargers "all over". So it'd be the "same difference".
Also, why sit at a charger for 40 minutes? Just fill up for 15 minutes and head for the next one.
A 40 minute charging stop would be if you're having a sit-down meal or such outside of the car.
Charging to full with the current batteries is something you'd only really do when stopped for the night.

More expensive might not last that much longer. They were around 50% more expensive in 2021, down to 15% in 2023. Sometime in the next decade or so.
They're already hitting price parity in China.
And that's before considering that the fuel and maintenance savings, where they already win on total cost of ownership, despite the occasional talk of tire consumption.

Except that BOTH of you should be taking a few minutes, not seconds, to get up and walk around a bit. It's the sitting down that is the problem, not just the driving.
Unlike refilling with gasoline, you both can be going and doing something else.
You're looking at maybe an extra half hour of driving.

Uh, say what? Lots of people are concerned about making them work "as well as ICE". Are you after "as well as" or are you actually after "Works identically to"? Because the two are different standards.

In my time we've gone from under 30 miles of range to over 300. We've gone from mandatory overnight charging to being able to reach 80% in 15 minutes. Batteries have gone from like a 3 year life to "longer than the rest of the car". We've gone from almost zero charging stations to over 200k publicly available.

You seem to demand instant home charging, when with ICE the only way to refuel at home is to mess with fuel cans, and most of us don't bother with that, and it's a very limited ability. Empty that fuel can, and you'll need to refill it at a gas station before you can use it again.

Buy an EV, and suddenly visiting a charging station isn't an option, for some reason?

Honestly, once one realizes that the constitution was written even before electricity, I think I can easily argue that the geofence describes it.

The trick is to realize that "particularly" does not mean "specifically" really. A warrant can be rather vague on what is to be seized, like "money", "documents", "drugs", etc...

In this case the location is rather specific in location and time: The vicinity of the Bank during the robbery.
Things to be seized: Digital data stretches this a bit, but "phone number and associated account holder" is also being specific.

In this case, even if it is 500 innocent bystanders being identified, I know of modern non-electronic searches that inconvenience far more people, like setting up blockades during a manhunt.

The founding fathers were, for the most part reasonable. The questions would thus be:
1. Does this have a fairly good chance of identifying the perp?
2. Can the search be restricted more without reducing the odds of identifying the perp?

In this case, the answer to 1 is yes, and 2 is no. That gives the court a strong argument to allow this.
It'd be equivalent to seizing a hotel's guest registry, for example, if a murder happened in the hotel and they thought a guest did it.
Would actually be LESS invasive than that, come to think of it. A guest registry of the 18th century could have months and maybe years of entries.

People are so used to hauling their phone everywhere today, without realizing that it is essentially a continuously active tracking device.

80% is still over 200 miles, over 2 hours of driving, when one is supposed to take a break anyways.
It is also because charging over 80% takes as long to reach 100% as reaching 80% from 10%.
It is literally faster to simply fill up to 80% then stop a bit earlier and fill up again.