And how much longer will that be the case? A decade? Two?
As long as HIPAA is in force, and unamended. Fax, due to its over-the-wire encryption, is specifically named in the law as a privacy-safe way to transmit medical records.
Damned if i know. A lot of them now use an app, and most of the apps talk to each other. So there’s a lot less faxing info from doctors office to doctors office than even a few years ago. But it’s still pretty common. The physical therapist wanted me to fax the doctors orders to them before they would let me schedule an appointment. It finally occurred to me i could print out those orders and bring them there, but they didn’t suggest it, i had to ask if that would be okay.
So fax still has its uses - just like FM radio.
This is exactly the argument I’ve been making. There’s nothing an in-car AM radio, which requires redesigning the entire electronics of the vehicle to accommodate it, can do that a battery-powered portable can’t. If anything, the portable is better, because D cells are cheaper than gasoline and you’re not going to be wanting to ride out a natural disaater in your car.
As an aside, D cells are another thing I haven’t seen in decades.
Nearly every car had an AM radio for decades, without requiring “redesigning the entire electronics of the vehicle to accommodate it.” AIUI, even for EVs, it does not require “redesigning the entire electronics of the vehicle to accommodate it” – it requires putting shielding on the radio and its wiring, and possibly relocating the antenna. Yes, a redesign, but not at the scale you make it out to be.
Hyperbole doesn’t help make your case any stronger.
You could duct-tape one of these to the dashboard for a vintage experience.
I wanna listen to WBZ-AM radio at night by skywave.
Removing the AM radio requires redesigning the receiver guts they’ve used for the last few years. All the non-recurring costs are associated with removing the AM capability, not retaining it.
Mine’s got one. Works fine. It’s not exactly an intractable problem for EVs
The new designs have already done that. The expense now would be shoehorning them back in.
An industry-funded study by the group Center for Automotive Research estimated it would cost automakers $3.8 billion to mitigate interference between EVs and AM radio.
Per the WSJ.
That’s $4 billion that will get passed on to the consumer, for a feature nobody is asking for and almost nobody uses, on the astronomical chance some Biblical-scale disaster where the entire communications grid (EXCEPT for AM radio) abruptly goes dark all at once in the middle of rush hour with absolutely no forewarning or time to prepare and the dashboard AM tuner is the only way to possibly inform millions of people what to do in order to not die.
We sell them at my store, but my radio actually runs on AAAs and/or a handcrank.
Over what time frame? How many years’ worth of EVs?
Also, it might just be that an “industry-funded study” might not be entirely bias-free in its assumptions, and it might just be a worst-case scenario, to try to scare the public and lawmakers into not supporting the legislation.
What? But folic acid is completely benign!
I know that they’re considered that way, but they actually have almost no privacy protection at all, and far less than even ordinary email, which has nowadays been almost completely replaced with secure email, which is far more protected yet.
When an avowed lefty is reduced to quoting the reactionary WSJ, the lion has truly laid down with the lamb. Or more like the lamb has laid down with the lion then been promptly swallowed thereby.
The WSJ’s news section is very good, and not especially biased. The op ed page is often reactionary. But they’re pretty good at keeping those apart.
Regardless of whether it was mentioned in the WSJ, my understanding is that the study which is being referred to was not done by the WSJ, but by the Center for Automotive Research, and funded by the automakers.
Sure, that’s suspect. I was replying to @LSLGuy , not to the comments about the source of the info.
FWIW, it’s an independent nonprofit that originated as a project of the University of Michigan.
The point is, this is a needless and costly solution to a problem that doesn’t exist, which is being marketed as a “safety measure” when it’s nothing more than corporate welfare for a dying industry with enough money to buy enough votes where it counts and which Republicans are eager to spin to mush-brained Boomers as “DEMOCRATS WANT TO BAN RADIO AND SILENCE FREEDOM”.
Remember all the cites we gave you yesterday, showing that emergency response and disaster services are also in favor of the measure? The cites showing that AM radios have better reach in remote areas than other channels? Oh, no, wait, those don’t fit your narrative.