It’s not at all comparable. If I go into a library and get a book on fixing cars, the librarian doesn’t follow me around suggesting Joe Rogan.

Kids books from the library don’t autoplay a pipeline of incrementingly extreme, dangerous or vapid content.

I don’t see the value in the data being greater than the cost of administrating a patchwork of varied regulations across the globe.

The Australian ban, and proposed bans in other countries (generally I only looked at a couple) aren’t targeting things like Nebula though, focus is on large scale user to user platforms.

I just checked out YouTube front page in a fresh browser and it’s several tiers below Romantasy in my opinion. You may have a more personalized experience, but the front door of Youtube is… nauseating.

The medium matters as well, the audio, visuals, length, like a sleezy, hyper active content casino.

Anyway, I cheer for any friction added to these tech companies because they are doing so much harm, so anything to slow them down.

But I do get the concerns around IDs and privacy (I personally wouldn’t provide any). I think regulatory capture concerns are real as well. My preference would be on targeting the recommendation systems, and also making the platforms liable for content they are broadcasting.

Youtube as a platform is trash (in my opinion). Not to say there aren’t some gems in there.

I’m not familiar with the channels you mentioned but trust your judgment. I would love to see a platform curated with high quality content.

“Hey mom and dad can I use ‘historyTube’” “Absolutely!”

Easy.

The analogies don’t really hold. Traditional Broadcasters have some standards. Jackass is Disney compared to the back alley swamp that is YouTube.

Think about the experience of going into a library or bookstore vs. YouTube, the content mix is not comparable.

The algorithms, content scale, and access is another world.

I wonder how much more effective the Australian ban will be when peer countries follow suite and erodes network effect.

Youtube is a massive problem for boys. There may be a couple of educational things on there but it’s adjacent to awful recommended content.

I would debate the value of the “educational” content as well. We certainly aren’t getting smarter through the internet. Read a book, find a mentor, stay in school.

They already have your name, phone number, age, gender and face… and are also tracking your every click and interest, every pause on scrolling, hover of your mouse, your relationships, where you were yesterday, the day before, what you buy…

How is it surveillance? Just don’t give them your ID or use the platform, they have negative value anyway.

My understanding is that a ban is not the desired goal, more an ‘emergency break’ while other regulatory means catch up.

Eh gas tax basically just covers Healthcare externalities from all the pollution. If you are in a country with private health care its even worse - drivers aren’t even covering the lung disease they are giving you!

I thought I was careful not to claim any stats. The only thing we know is that EV fires are less frequent but more intense.

Probably not much data out there because it’s so infrequent. You are much more likely to die from collisions I imagine.

I think Teslas cast a dark halo in this area as well. Newer vehicles, but it wouldn’t surprise me of their drivers carelessness mirrored their largest shareholder.

Its worth knowing and researching to reduce fire incidence, but combustion engines have bigger problems.

I think Teslas shouldn’t speak for all EVs.

the company has demonstrated a very high tolerance for risk. In execution, but also they don’t seem to care about reputational risk. Other manufacturers with a larger business at stake, I would expect to handle recalls, safety in a different manner (one of the reasons they are lagging in the EV space)

So… EVs have significantly less fires than combustion engines

But EVs fires are more severe

Tesla is a mess.

EV chemistry is getting better and safer over time.

Combustion engines are largely at their limit.

https://firerover.com/resources/how-often-do-ev-batteries-catch-fire/#%3A~%3Atext=Here's+what+current+studies+say%2Cper+100%2C000+for+gasoline+cars

ICE vehicles have far more fires. EVs are more intense, but significantly less frequent

Misleading article. Someone reading this may think that a PHEV will have higher fuel consumption than claimed. When it reality it should be clarified that fuel efficiency is based on roughly 75% electric drive share.

I see the point where they should adjust that down based on real.world usage.

But… if you are expected to drive 75% electric based on battery range and your usage, you will hit the manufacturers claims, give or take

There is a strong possibility we would also get it wrong. Diversity is a strength. Who knows what tomorrow brings.