tlogan

We should do something here.

Nothing will be done at Federal level.

But california is big enough to make things moving without any federal level law.

For example, what about this:

- no sales taxes on new EV sales

- free registration for 5 years

- free bridge tolls for 5 years

This will be paid by increasing gas taxes, sales taxes on ICE, and registration fees for ICE.

That might convince some of companies to start making EVs again.

I do not know. It is all about priorities.

Raise taxes on gas? Put extra taxes on sell ICE vehicles? Increase registration fees for ICE vehicles? (In short - ICE sales will paying for money lost via EV sales)

I’m not saying it will be easy. I’m saying that if we really want EVs to succeed we can do it.

I 100% understand that nothing will be done on the federal level. But california is big enough to make things moving without any federal level law.

For example, what about:

- no sales taxes on new EV sales

- free registration for 5 years

- free bridge tolls for 5 years

That might convince some of these companies to start making EVs again.

What about no sales taxes on EV purchases (full sales tax exemption) in California?

The problem with many of these EVs is that they were way too expensive. The main reason companies were producing them is due to regulatory requirements and how emissions standards are calculated, not necessarily because wanted to sell these EVs.

What we really need are incentives for companies to build more affordable EVs. California could play a role here, but given the strong opinions we have about Elon Musk, nothing will be done.

We must not be visiting the same city.

Excellent insight. Trust is key for capitalism. And for functioning democracy. When trust is lost, whether in the system or in your fellow citizens, everything begins to suffer.

I think of society as an extended family. If you do not trust your spouse, many things in your home simply will not work.

No. I think the core issue is that they used her 2019 booking photo (a mugshot) from a public intoxication arrest. I am not sure whether a photo like that is reliable :)

In the end, the detective compared the booking photo with the camera footage and concluded they were the same person, then presented that to the judge.

I also wonder what her “probation” was for. Maybe she once wrote a bad check and got into trouble, which might have made the detective more inclined to believe it was her.

Anyway, this does not appear to be an AI issue at all.

But it is nice scary story to remind us not to be lazy and trust it unconditionally.

This has nothing to do with AI.

There are also a few questions that remain unanswered:

- Did she have previous arrests, and did they use booking photos to identify her? I found someone named Angela Lipps who was arrested in 2001, 2003, 2017, and 2019. The 2017 arrest was for a probation violation: https://archive.ph/CpmXu The 2019 arrest was for public intoxication: https://archive.ph/yjFL9

- Another confusing detail is that she was in jail for four months without being extradited. That is quite unusual, unless the local authorities were holding her on unrelated charges.

So this news story seems to have nothing to do with AI. It is also very light on details about the case and what actually happened. And actual criminal case here.

And? Do you agree with the point or the idea the poster said? Or not?

I remember that in the early days of HN there were people who would downvote comments just because they had grammar mistakes, without even trying to understand the idea or what the poster was trying to say.

I guess this thread looks like a bunch of grammar Nazis crying because they have lost their ammunition :)

I am here to express my ideas and opinions. They might not always be popular, but they are my opinions (that is reason that I have 3x less karma than you but I was here 11 years longer). And some people will debate my opinions and try to convince me that I am wrong. And sometimes I learn soemthing.

But if we start ignoring ideas and opinions and instead focus on superficial things like how they are written or communicated, then the whole point of HN is lost.

Look your comment: a lot of fluff and nice sentence construction. But I have no idea what you are trying to say (missing forest from the trees? Practice and context?).

But it will be upvoted because it has nice English.

Anyway, AI is a future and this thread just shows how shallow we humans are. And we will blame AI. Because we are shallow.

You are missing the point here.

It is not about whether the comment was written by AI, a native English speaker, English major, or ESL.

What matters is an idea or an opinion. That is all what matters.

The only data I trust are from IEA.

And the data they are publishing are not encouraging for the future of the world.

But we are missing the point here.

It is not about whether the comment was written by AI, a native English speaker, English major, or ESL.

What matters is an idea or an opinion. That is all what matters.

This is similar to when people check someones post history and if they are pro Trump, they are immediately against their idea or opinion.

True, but the BlueSky audience is not really into following professional sports. I believe there was statistics (or just rumor) showing that conservative-leaning people are about 50% more likely to follow professional sports than liberal-leaning people. Sadly, I cannot find the source, but it might be so obvious that nobody bothered to run a proper poll. Or this is just what everybody believes so everybody goes with it.

I would rather wait for official stats before claiming victory. I think there will be a little upward adjustment from “likely” numbers because of this AI thingy.

https://www.iea.org/countries/china/emissions

The stats for 2025 are yet official.

The quote from your link:

> China’s carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions fell by 1% in the final quarter of 2025, likely securing a decline of 0.3% for the full year as a whole

So, increase of 4.7% and then (likely) decrease of 0.3% is a great progress?

I would rather wait for official IEA data before claiming victory: https://www.iea.org/countries/china/emissions

The quote from your link:

> China’s carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions fell by 1% in the final quarter of 2025, likely securing a decline of 0.3% for the full year as a whole

So, increase of 4.7% and then (likely) decrease of 0.3% is a great progress?

This is a CCP propaganda article. The IEA have not yet released 2024 estimates.

Because of this: https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-6079807/v1

Global warming is accelerating, yet we as a human race are doing very little to prevent it. Instead, we keep arguing about how Western countries need to match China’s approach to emissions. I kid you not, that is literally what people on HN are telling me, while China continues increasing its emissions every single year.

Sadly, it does not come from other states. It comes from other countries which, amazingly, tend to have much less strict environmental regulations.

Yes, California is a little cleaner because we have fewer refineries and gas is more expensive, but globally we are probably about even.

The IEA says China’s CO₂ emissions rose by 565 Mt in 2023 to 12.6 Gt, which it states was a 4.7% increase from 2022.

So any emission reduction done by developed countries is offset by China.

They are doing so good that they increased their emission by 4.7% from 2022 to 2023. /s

The latest major IEA estimate says China’s CO₂ emissions reached 12.6 Gt in 2023, up 4.7% from 2022.

On the other hand U.S. CO₂ emissions decreased slightly between 2022 and 2023. About 2–3% (from 4.79 to 4.68 Gt)

I just do not understand how we can claim any kind of progress here.

China CO2 emission increased a lot over the last 20 years and it is growing every years. Not decreasing but increasing. The IEA estimate says China’s CO₂ emissions reached 12.6 Gt in 2023, up 4.7% from 2022.

On the other hand U.S. CO₂ emissions decreased slightly between 2022 and 2023. About 2–3% (from 4.79 to 4.68 Gt)

[1] https://www.iea.org/countries/china/emissions

So we do not need to worry. China and India will cut their emission a lot and we US just need to cut a little. Problem solved. /s

From 2022 to 2023 (lates report), China increased their emission from 11.9 Gt to 12.6 Gt. The US decreased from 4.79 to 4.68 Gt. So we (US and China) increased emission by 0.6 Gt.

So we (the world) are polluting more and more and you are telling me that we are on a great trajectory.

The entire west world contributes 28.8%. US is about 11%. [1]

[1] https://www.iea.org/reports/global-energy-review-2025/co2-em...

Using the IEA’s 2024 energy-related CO₂ data, advanced economies emitted 10.9 billion tonnes out of a global 37.8 billion tonnes in 2024, which is about 28.8% of the world total.

So if developed countries completely eliminate all pollution we will reduce it by 30%. Good. Then what is the next step? War with China? Attack India?

[1] https://www.iea.org/reports/global-energy-review-2025/co2-em...

If the United States stopped polluting 100%, global pollution would decrease by only about 10%. Probably even less, because much of that pollution would simply be exported through outsourcing. So what happens next?