sillystu04

Isn't this a matter of tort law rather than regulation?

> Without renters there would be no housing Ponzi scheme

If by "housing Ponzi scheme" you mean house prices increasing then this isn't necessarily true.

Even in a world where private renting was illegal and people were forced to choose between home ownership and homelessness, house prices could increase over time because of restricted supply, increased populated and wage growth.

That sounds dangerously close to victim blaming.

Obviously if Co-op were negligent in their handling of member data they're also guilty of something. But even the best organisations have some level of exposure to phishing related attacks.

My understanding is that V2G (vehicle to grid) requires transfer switches etc to be installed to your home electrical setup so you don't accidentally backfeed electricity into the grid. So it's never going to be a simply a matter of getting a better EV.

Why exactly do you want a backup? If you're looking to maintain a few key appliances or internet during a grid outage a vehicle with V2L like an MG4 or BYD might be sufficient.

You probably already know this, but for the sake of providing context to other readers: V2G - vehicle to grid, providing power to the grid from your car battery like is common for home solar batteries; V2L - vehicle to load, a power outlet using energy from your car battery.

> Only a completely closed-off environment with no access to the internet could prevent this.

Even then, an LLM running locally could still operate.

To play devils advocate, a lack of sanctions also allows countries to advance technology at a tremendous velocity.

The Ford Motor Company's dealings in Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union significantly helped the adoption of mass production in those countries.

> To me buying new cars is just throwing away money

Why should a car manufacturer care about your preferences if you're never going to buy new from them?

It's annoying but people like us who care about things like TCO are probably never going to buy new cars under any circumstances, so our concerns about electronic components don't motivate designers.

Even if we might help residual values of leases and buy used parts, our influence over car companies is radically lower than new car buyers.

> Beyond that, the chinese EV brands are in market capture mode right now. The competition is cut throat and the margins are extremely thin.

BYD is profitable. Admittedly that's more of an exception than a rule for Chinese EV brands, but BYD is also the most important.

> It‘s a market skimming strategy that will presumably be a last man standing scenario. If the winner(s) are decided, prices will definitely not remain as low as they are right now in some places.

Even if most of the brands disappear we're very unlikely to get to an n=1 monopoly scenario. Even a couple dozen or so companies competing in the EV space should prevent margins from getting too high.

In the olden days the ICE industry was at times run by fewer than 10 companies per country, that was enough competition to prevent consumers getting too screwed by pricing.

Perhaps the next big programming language will be designed specifically for LLM friendliness. Some things which are human friendly like long keywords are just a waste of tokens for LLMs, and there could be other optimisations too.

The Romans never referred to the Greeks, Jews or Egyptians as barbarian. If they did it certainly wasn't with great frequency.

It almost always targeted at the tribal Anglo, Celtic or Germanic peoples. And in these circumstances it was really an insult at their style of government rather than their ethnic identity.

Quite the opposite. AI will enable the creation of ever more macros and guide users to make even more elaborate pivot tables.

They've adopted a different flavour of devilishness. See VSCode versus Visual Studio, or their approach to AI.

Bill Gates would've bought OpenAI. Satya shares their mission of developing AI for the good of humanity. He charitably donated billions of dollars in Azure credits in exchange for nothing besides a voice at the table and a license to help enable other organisations use AI through MS services.

In a way it's a PR difference, but I feel that understates the change.

In hindsight, it would've been worthwhile for Microsoft to tolerate heavy losses for a decade on Windows phone. Like they did with Bing or Azure.

In the 2020s every serious app developer from Epic to Spotify to Facebook to Tinder is desperately concerned by the platform policies of Apple/Google, and would gladly support Windows phone as first class platform. And so would consumers - enterprises would love to have their AD groups work neatly on employee devices and many individual buyers would love to have more open freedom too.

I suspect it's more of a human nature problem. Perhaps a good work culture might allow you to delay its oncoming slightly past 7 people - but eventually all large social groups get political dynamics.