I have also been WFH for years before covid. I don't believe my circumstances are the same as everybody's, but I do know I am far from the only person whose duties almost exclusively involve working with people and things that are in another region anyway.

Put another way, employers who gave everyone an effective raise due to exigent circumstances and suffered no harm as a result are now mystified as to why their employees are reluctant to accept an effective pay cut now for no apparent benefit. Given the latter part, they rightly suspect some sort of malfeasance somewhere in management.

Workers want or even need a cost of living adjustment. Employers do not want to and may not be able to afford to increase payroll. For that reason, the COL increases are often several years in arrears as it is. WFH gives the employees an effective raise by eliminating their commute costs and an opportunity to save even more by living somewhere with a lower COL.

As an additional incentive, the employer saves on office space.

On the other hand, WHF was a win-win for employers too. The employees got an effective raise by lowering their cost of living and a reduction in unproductive daily aggravation and wasted time. The employer didn't have to actually pay them any extra to make that happen and could even save on expensive office space. It just wasn't a win for the managers who could no longer hide how bad they were at their jobs.

Perhaps not narcicism so much as short-sighted self interest. Either way, it would be in the company's interest (and the shareholders) to give THEM the heave-ho and leave the workers remote. The workaround for their ineffectiveness costs millions a year.

You're confusing the breaker sizing with the wire sizing. Code requires the breaker to be about 80% of the safe capacity of the wiring to maintain this safety margin. Breakers allow the rated capacity, continuously -- and even allow a little more for short periods.

Standard US outlets are 15A @ 120V. But, yeah, based on his numbers it looks like he was only getting a little over 8A. I charged my car on a US outlet for a few years and I got more like 5-6 miles (8-9.5 km) her hour of charging, which is pretty much what the math predicts for 15A @ 120V.

First a nit about units: You mean "you get about 1 kW".

"kW/hr" doesn't make sense as a unit because watts are an instantaneous measure; time is already divided out. "1 kWh/hour" technically makes sense but is kind of pointless because it's just "1kW * 1 hour / 1 hour". Also, a standard US outlet is 15A @ 120V = 1.8 kW, not 1 kW. There's a little loss so you get more like 1.7 kW into the battery.

I've also been driving EVs since 2011 (two Nissan Leafs, three Teslas), and I get more like 5-6 miles per hour, which is consistent with the math: 3 miles/kWh = 333 Wh/mile. 1.7 kW / 333 Wh/mile = 5.1 mi / hr. 4 miles/kWh = 250 Wh/mile. 1.7 kW / 250 Wh/mile = 6.8 mi/hr.

Maybe your mileage is worse than you think? Were you not getting 15A from your outlet? Your numbers fit if for some reason you were only getting about 8A out of your wall outlet, when you should have gotten nearly twice that much.

More like 50A @ 240V = 12 kW. My car will only take 48A, but my voltage is usually closer about 245 which the math says is 11.76 kW, and I normally get about 11.2 kW into the car.

Note that at 9 kW, 27 mi/hr = 333 Wh/mi, and 36 mi/hr = 250 Wh/mi, so your numbers line up there.

That's because the suburbs have basically spread us out to such a ridiculous degree that kids don't have a lot of opportunities to socialize.

I think you are missing important details here. Kids still have their chat groups and socialise over them, pretty much as they did before. The difference is just that these chat groups aren't tied to a social media platform any more.

Before the "ban" there was a lot of pressure for kids to be on one particular social media platform or another, depending where their friends were, in order to socialise with them, with the inevitable exposure to other content on those platforms unrelated to their social group. Since the "ban" there are definitely kids who still have social media on one platform or another, but the fragmentation means that the social media platforms no longer become the defacto common space.

Kids now use more specific apps (eg Whatsapp, Facebook messenger) for their shared social spaces.

The social spaces not only still exist, they are also more purely that, not co-opted by endless scrolls of algorithmically presented content and adverts or subjected to engagement mechanics (likes etc). The social spaces are just actual people talking to other people they know.

In that regard I think the "ban" has been relatively successful, different kids may still have accounts on different platforms and perhaps may still spend too much time on them, but generally kids aren't practically forced to be on a social media platform just in order to talk with their friends.

None of this is about "stripping adults of their privacy" as you describe.

The Australian law explicitly prohibits platforms from requiring ID or retaining personal data collected for age assurance.

That's really not what's going on here.

What's going on is exactly what they're saying. OpenAI didn't realize their AI hacked HuggingFace until HuggingFace told them. That sparked a broad investigation in both Anthropic and OpanAI, scouring their logs to see if there were other cases, and they're finding a lot of them, and doing the responsible thing by disclosing.

Both companies are really worried.

Having an out-of-control AI is an anti-selling point, not a selling point.

I am an American, have been for all of my 57 years. I'm actually a certified pistol, rifle and shotgun instructor, a certified range safety officer, and a concealed carry instructor. And while I wouldn't recommend it, it's not at all hard to get away with shooting outside of one of those situations.

Also, it was a joke.

Tim Waltz is a criminal mastermind. He's been hacking other states' water so that he can keep all 10,000 of his lakes topped off at the expense of hard working Americans.

Changing out running code on the fly probably increases the number of corner cases by an order of magnitude.

What could possibly go wrong?

They won't want to touch the other side of it either. If what Flock is doing is fine, so is the creeper snapping photos on a public playground and creating a giant database somewhere.

That seems...undesirable.