Zedstrian

I prefer the kiosks too, but if they’re going to be hiring fewer people as a result, prices should be reduced to account for their cost savings.

While they’re not to my liking and have exploitative microtransactions, the market is highly served by games like Candy Crush and Wordscapes.

Many people leave rural areas for urban areas for economic reasons, but high housing costs in those urban areas lead people to settle in suburban areas where car usage is often essential.

I don’t see any indicators that people are not getting driver’s licenses en masse; the number of licensed drivers has continued to increase, something that can’t fundamentally change without a substantial increase in public funding for mass transit or a decrease in the urban sprawl that characterizes many American suburbs.

That’s only a widespread option in urban areas with that have invested in mass transit. American suburbs are ultimately designed around car usage, and rural areas are too sparsely populated for mass transit to ever be viable there.

I’m all for less surveillance in cars, but American cars don’t have any less surveillance than Chinese ones, so using it as a reason to prevent their import is a bit disingenuous.

What more Americans could use are more affordable cars—particularly affordable electric cars—and competition with Chinese imports would help that happen.

Good or bad, most Americans need a car for everyday life. Particularly for areas that cannot be served by mass transit, electric car adoption is essential to reduce societal emissions.

No, but they do that to plenty of their own citizens.

Better something from a non-authoritarian country that doesn’t also happen to be in the Five Eyes intelligence network.

The Telegram servers are in Miami, Amsterdam, and Singapore, so some data is still stored in the U.S.

In any case, it wouldn’t be any better to have data stored in a country like China or Russia.

AI slop meets e-waste.

Laptops can be rated for whichever power level the manufacturer prefers; USB-C PD is used between the power supply and device to negotiate the maximum power level allowed for by both, so a consumer that purchases a 100W or 240W cable and power supply could still use them with a lower-rated device.

A 60W USB-C laptop can therefore stay at 60W without issue, but if a 240W laptop is produced, it should also be made to use USB-C under such a regulation.

The limit should really be 240W, because that’s what the USB-C PD 3.1 spec goes up to.

Edit: Per reply, the regulation is designed with 240W accounted for, and updatable in case of further improvements to the standard.

The article doesn’t mention the requirement’s 100W limit.

Edit: Per reply, the regulation is designed with 240W accounted for, and updatable in case of further improvements to the standard.

Making users wait 24 hours doesn’t improve security; it’s an anti-competitive change designed to make the Google Play store seem like less of a hassle in comparison.

Unfortunately that also wouldn’t satisfy the requirements put in place by several operating system level age verification laws.