Car insurance apps can only legally track your location if you consent to it. A Western form is unlikely to do it without permission due to the cost of fines (Europe) or class action law suits (USA). And how would it know you are driving as opposed to just being in a car? And it's still not accessing my heart rate. There are probably apps which illegally track you, in which case don't install low reputation game apps

Eh, it makes me go and research it to see if it is true or not, quite often. When I was younger I used to annoy people for not not accepting anything without a whole load of peer-reviewed research, apparently.

(since my anecdotal evidence is more than one person, it beats a one person anecdote. It's best to out anecdote each other until it's data. Or have someone do a study).

Some may, some may not. I am not sure you have provided us with much data here other than an anecdote. I know people with high IQs (~180) who are not good with other people so would not "understand how to utilize brilliant people".

But is the cheaper solution a big wire or more or more diverse generation or storage in the UK?

I made an error about PHEV/HEV battery size and admitted it. That's not BEVs, which is what is now the discussion, so not relevant to your 'murdered in the market' comment.

Er, I posted the evidence. That's showing knowledge not ignorance. Don't be so dumb.

But you've never done that despite being called out multiple times over your incorrect statements over multiple years.

Are there any WARLOCK companies?

It's not tracking my heart beat or blood sugar, though, so I am not sure how having a mobile with me is overly relevant. Unless the COVID vaccinations and the 5G nanobots are doing it.

Please point out where I am ignorant and in detail with respect to the sales figures.

My entire narrative is things I haven't said? Wow. I am not sure how I respond to such nonsense. Can you maybe try some substantive points. Where is my data on BEV sales materially wrong?

In what way did I move the goalposts? You made an assertion about sales, I used evidence to show they you were incorrect. Showing you that you were incorrect is 'moving the goalposts'? Are you for real?

Please point out where the data I posted is wrong, not your other garbage verbiage please.

Neither am I. But I used data not feelings.

Oh. I did. That's what I did to get actual European sales figures.

Eh?

Within a ten year period enough to nearly eliminate obesity? Unlikely.

Only if they don't bring BEVs on stream at a price point consumers are willing to purchase them at. Which they are doing. In terms of total market share, European manufacturers in aggregate dominate European BEV sales. Sales are up YoY by 28% Q1 for BEV, slightly up for PHEV. That's not 'murdering European car manufacturers'. In fact, via subsidy, it's been pretty good for them. Chinese-made BEV sales have increased rapidly but are still a rather small percentage of the total. The BEV list is (in order): Tesla, Volkswagen, BMW, Audi, Renault, Skoda, Mercedes, Kia, Peugot, Volvo, Hyundai. BYD, Cupra, Ford, Vauxhall, Citroen, Mini, Oolestar, MG, Porche, Toyota, Dacia, Fiat, Nissan, Xpeng. European manufacturers have 68% of the overall market, or 70% based on the fact that Ford in Europe is fairly separate from Ford in the USA and production is in Europe. It might increase rapidly, but Chinese-built vehicles only have a 4% market share at present. 68% market share by European manufacturers is not 'murdering' them. Tesla is at 12%. In the USA, Tesla has been below 68% for three years in the USA, so presumably you would say that it is being 'murdered' in the USA market?

And it looked like it just caused people to re-time purchases, not abandon them, given that demand has bounced back again. Sometimes, as previously noted, sales have been down but in the context of overall reduced new car demand (e.g., France). In a few instances, share has fallen, but that seems to be always short-lived. If you are trying to argue that is permanently damaged sales, the data doesn't support it.

Not ideal long-term, it would seem to me, unless managing diabetes which has a series of sometimes overlapping risk areas:

Common Long-Term Side Effects:

Gastrointestinal Issues: Nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and constipation are frequently reported, especially during the initial phase of treatment and can persist for some users.
Pancreatitis:

Inflammation of the pancreas, which can cause severe abdominal pain and potentially require hospitalization.
Thyroid Tumors:

Ozempic has a boxed warning regarding the potential for thyroid tumors, including medullary thyroid carcinoma, particularly for individuals with a family history of this cancer.
Vision Changes:

Some individuals experience blurry vision, potentially due to changes in blood sugar levels affecting the lens of the eye.

Less Common, but Serious, Side Effects:

Low Blood Sugar (Hypoglycemia): Especially in combination with other diabetes medications, hypoglycemia can lead to serious complications.

Kidney Problems: Dehydration from severe gastrointestinal issues can lead to kidney damage.

Gallbladder Problems: Ozempic may increase the risk of gallstones and bile duct blockage.