For the best hybrids, the major advantage is not the regenerative braking. While that helps save some energy, it is relatively minor.

Instead the main advantage is that you can design the internal combustion engine (ICE) to run at a consistent RPM. You do not need to run the ICE at different speeds to get 30 mph, 45 mph and 60 mph. Instead you have one that just runs at a set RPM. Then you use the hybrid battery to supply all the power at low speeds and a boost at the max speeds.

The more efficient ICE can add 10 more mpg to an engine alone, without even considering the regenerative braking.

Under most laws, abandoned property is considered fair game. That's why it's legal for people to scavenge from what others put out at the curb. These "trespassers" might have a legal case justifying their right to be there and even take stuff, if they wanted to hire lawyers to defend themselves.

What a giant load of horseshit. You really have absolutely zero idea how all of this works, don't you?

You have no idea what the article is saying or what is real. here is an unbiased summary of reality.

No state 'dislikes' billionaires, they all want them.
All states have various taxes.
A bunch of conservatives claim California hates billionaries, because they tax them more than certain red states do.
Some conservatives think a proposed one time tax law in California will drive away billionaires.
The actual facts are that billionaires do MORE business in California than they do in ANY other state. After it is New York City.
California has not changed anything about themselves, they continue to do the same thing they always did.

This article is implying that the conservatives are wrong about the relationship between California and Billionaires, as demonstrated by these facts. But of course, the conservatives that hate California also do not respect the Los Angeles Times.

If a person makes an offer and accept the money, that is a non-verbal contract for services. Certain states have laws that prevent businesses from cancelling orders without just cause.
In those cases, it may very well be illegal for a company to cancel an order because an AI that was authorized to set prices did not follow the company's intentions.

While humans are being asked to conserve energy, the data centers are free to buy as much as can be provided.

The real problem is that the companies are going to try and refuse the responsibility for the AI actions.

As in:

Yes my AI was empowered to set prices, but we did not want it to set a price less than a $1000 and it set a price of 10 cents. No we do not want to give up all other transactions the AI approved.

Yes the AI hired only christian white woman and illegally asked if they had children, but we did not mean to break the law. That was the LLM, not our fault.

Yes the AI illegally rejected every rental applicant that was single but we did not mean to violate the Fair Housing Law. We never told it to do that, it is just the algorithm.

You can't sue us if we did not intend to break the law.

No. They can definitely sue you for unintenionally breaking the law.

In fact, this technology is almost useless for identifying dark skinned people. Or maybe that's a feature?

Is this sarcasm? Every US state and territory has ID/DL cards. The British are supposedly rolling out a revamped ID this year.

It's only cheaper if you do not get sued for slandering an innocent person that your camera falsely reported tot he police.

Basically, what is going on here is companies shifting risk from themselves to their customers.

Does that sound to you like a good idea? To be so afraid of your customers stealing that you treat them with massive disrespect?

#1) After the Maine Candidate dropped out, the chances of the DNC taking Maine rose above what it was before.

#2) I said impeached again, not removed from office. The Dems will do it if they get 51% if only to make it harder for him to continue to destroy the country.

#3) Plattner was a bad Democrat candidate in part because he did the same things the Republicans candidate do and stay in office. Trump himself has been convicted of lying to the US government not to mention paying large sums of money (> 1 million each time) because he:
a) Refused to rent apartments to black people.
b) Refusing to let black Casino Dealers work in the much better paying high net worth games
c) raped women
d) Raped 13 year old girls at his friend Epstein's parties.
e) scammed students out of money for a fake real estate course.

These are JUST the cases where he had to pay money, not the many other crimes he has been accused of.

How did he win election? He has huge social skills, no ethics, and never ran for lesser office. If you run for lesser office you do not get immunity and the higher people in the party kick you out when they find out about your crimes. But he never ran for anything less than Presidency so he was never properly vetted until after he won and acquired a bunch of loyal idiots.

Maybe because factory workers are paid by the hour?

Keep in mind, before the change, they couldn't get people to sign up. In other words, they considered flexibility to be *more* important than full-time work. That's how I read the story.

I don't know. If this were true, why did the factories struggle to get people to sign up when they offered only full-time jobs, and now that they offer a-la-carte shifts, people are jumping at the chance? If it were really such a bad thing, people wouldn't be showing up.

That's not how I defined it, and you know it.