That last but is almost NMEA 2000, which standardizes exactly that kind of information, but in boats. It’s old enough that they based it on CANbus, but there are many repeater products to add IP devices (Ethernet, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth) to the network.

ETA: By which I mean to say, plenty of designs already exist in the marine market which could be used to bridge a car’s CANbus to consumer devices, if they wanted to.

And, eliminate Euclidean zoning in the U.S., so that people can live near where they work, or work near where they live. (Not all of us can do it, or like working from home.)

Well, the chief of police in my city did this (accidental discharge of gun in the oven) once, so make of that what you will. He did have the integrity to discipline himself, per department policy.

How about a government-sponsored, non-profit authentication service? That is, it should be impossible to get a loan, open a line of credit, or anything else in somebody’s name, without the lending institution verifying that it’s actually on behalf of the named individual. Eliminate the security-through-obscurity technique of using bits of easily-leaked personal information as a poor substitute for actual authentication.

I mean, (as a comparative example) I have to go through an OAuth2 consent dialog to connect a third-party app to my email account, yet somebody can saddle me with huge debts based on knowing a 9-digit number that just about everybody knows? It’s the system that’s broken, tightening up the laws on PII is just a band-aid.

Paved roads don’t just naturally occur, though. That lifestyle is already an insane prospect, unsustainabke but for the large tax subsidy required to enable it.

I live in the U.S. That comment is 100% true, no matter where one lives.

Kind of a self-selecting phenomenon, isn’t it? The haters won’t approach you IRL to berate it, and the admirers aren’t going to seek out an online forum to gush about it.

This is an infuriating aspect of this case. The courts could have held the clinic responsible for this loss without declaring that all frozen embryos are children by invoking the “prime mover” concept. Other courts have used it in, for example, surrogacy cases. In short, that concept holds that it’s the intent of the parent(s) that matters, as the prime movers in the process of bringing a child into the world, not just the mixing of some genetic material. Those destroyed embryos could have become children, as it was the parents’ intention to do so. And if nobody intends to implant embryos, for whatever reason, without the intent to make a child, they’re merely organic material, neatly sidestepping those questions.

But, of course, the court wanted to impose its religious orthodoxy rather than issue a sensible ruling. Now we have those thorny questions.

Now you tell me.

Could try the *arr software.

Haha, do you ever feel like the last one to get the joke? I do sometimes.

It’s gotten to the point where I kind of hope it’s not the real Margot Robbie. I want to stand in awe of somebody out there who’s this committed to the joke.