You’re correct on its literal meaning, although colloquially I understand it has come to be used to simply reference the non-linear nature of increasing technology and computing power. Not sure about batteries as they relate to self driving cars, but I think we’re both on the same page here overall.

Moore’s Law may see 50 years diminish to more like 20, but yeah, this shit is happening orders of magnitude further down the timeline than Musk, the Big-3 CEO’s, and all the SV douchebro-fucks continue to insist. I’m as sick of constantly hearing the “only just 5 years off” mantra as the baby boom generation must’ve…

“But with the increase of distracted driving—and the difficulty of enforcing texting and driving laws—insurance companies are starting to get a little desperate.”

Nah, it’s difficult to enforce only in the context of current motor vehicle laws. We went through this same shift with the drunk driving “legal…

53 miles actually for the Gen 2, but conservative surface street driving in temperate weather will easily net you well into the 60's. I charge mine with the OEM charge cord from a basic 110v outlet in my garage, and totally dead to 100% at 12 amps takes ~13 hours. That said, it’s a rare commuting day where I exhaust…

And then their invariable hand-wringing over “why would you buy a $45,000+ MSRP car with only a 35 mile range!!!???”.

I’m on Volt #2 and think it’s a incredibly remarkable vehicle, like you and many others seem to. Its problem, to address your question, is that it’s simply hard to explain to most people due to longstanding, ingrained paradigms about cars. I don’t expect non-technical “rubes” to get it, but in my time of ownership I’m…

I live in SD too and feel the same way about our property taxes when it comes to schools. I’m happily single, no kids, and never intend to have any, so I’d love a break on the portion of my property taxes that go to Crumb-Cruncher U, public playgrounds, etc. ;-)

Oh, I agree. But less arrows in the quill is never a bad thing. Also, it is much easier to prove you did signal in today’s world, where nearly every cruiser has a dash cam running.

Absolutely material. The lion’s share of Americans don’t believe the government should be in the business of profiting off the scarcity of the public goods they control. So yes, they create and maintain the parking spaces, set a time limit if they desire and enforce it, and set taxes appropriately to cover all of…

I see this as a wash--If someone is willing to go to the trouble of driving into a crowded area simply because they can park for free, then that same person would likely be willing to pay a buck or two to park in the same place.

We can go down the rabbit hole of who pays taxes and when, and what government revenue is used for which items and where it comes from, etc., etc. But the bottom line is that unless it’s a toll road, no one is paying directly to drive on a public thoroughfare, so there’s a logic argument to be made as to why those…

Correct—Enforce the time restriction with citations for violators, but don’t use meters to charge for parking.

Moreover, it’s PC grounds for a stop when the cop has a “hunch” that something’s otherwise amiss with the vehicle or its driver, so that he may then begin a fishing expedition under color of law.

I don’t believe CA even has language that specifies a required method of front display. So if you are in possession of the absent plate and do get a fix-it ticket for its absence, you can simply toss it onto the dash so that it shows through the windshield and head to your local PD for their sign-off.

That’s an easy one—Every new car deal I’ve made, I’ve been patently clear with the dealer that I will outright walk and refuse delivery of any vehicle with drill damage to the front bumper. And I live in CA where front tags are (technically) mandatory. Buying used is a different story, of course, as are front tag…

Tennessee?

Turnover is accomplished just as easily with a “2 Hour Parking Only” sign, without charging a fee to stop one’s car along on a public street.

On private property, for sure. But it can be argued that the government shouldn’t be in the free-market business of capitalizing off of scarcity, especially vis-à-vis a road that is supposed to be a public good.

Turnover is accomplished just as easily with a “2 Hour Parking Only” sign, without charging a fee to stop one’s car along on a public street.

I’m with you on this one. If you can drive on it for free, where’s the logic in having to pay to stop on it? I’ve never understood the notion of charging drivers for stopping their cars (other than on private property).