News

Jeremy Clarkson has been working with Amazon Prime’s streaming arm since he left the BBC and Top Gear in 2015. However, that relationship is not likely to last into 2025, Variety reports. Citing its own sources, Variety claims that Amazon Prime Video is “likely” planning to stop working with Clarkson after already-ordered episodes of his two programs, Clarkson’s Farm and The Grand Tour, wrap in 2024. Under the expected plan, Clarkson would finish out his existing agreements with the company before both parties move on at the end of the deal. That would likely mean a third season of Clarkson’s Farm and four more episodes of The Grand Tour.Better TimesThe decision is a response to Clarkson’s widely derided column about Meghan Markle, which blamed her for the actions of her husband, Prince Harry. Clarkson took particular heat for a reference to a scene in Game of Thrones, suggesting that Markle be “made to parade naked through the streets of every town in Britain while the crowds chant, ‘Shame!’ and throw lumps of excrement at her.” Clarkson apologized for the column a few days after it ran, then again on Instagram Monday. In the second apology, he also announced that he has already apologized to Markle and Prince Harry directly.”Usually, I read what I’ve written to someone else before filing, but I was home alone on that fateful day, and in a hurry,” Clarkson wrote in his Instagram apology Monday. “So when I’d finished, I just pressed send. And then, when the column appeared the next day, the land mine exploded.”While no change in plans has been formally announced, Amazon called off an upcoming press conference to promote Clarkson’s Farm shortly after the Variety report was released Monday. More

First things first: this is just a proposed bill, and even if it’s adopted, it would not be an actual ban on electric-vehicle sales in Wyoming.Instead, this is a political messaging bill, one that spreads love to the oil and gas industry and says EVs just don’t work in the state.We agree that different regions of the country are positioned in different ways when it comes to EV adoption, but we see through the legislators’ intent with this bill because they added a line that says that, should the bill be adopted, a copy will be sent to the governor of California. Why might that be?Republican legislators in Wyoming have decided it’s time to bring the debate over electric-vehicle sales in the state squarely into the political arena. Four state senators and two state representatives have introduced a bill proposal (SJ0004) that expresses support “for phasing out the sale of new electric vehicles in Wyoming by 2035.”It’s a simple little bill, one that presents wildly unbalanced views of the benefits and costs of EVs and wouldn’t, in the end, actually ban EV sales. Not yet, anyway. If adopted, the bill would simply do two things. First, it would force the legislature to shoot for the goal “that the sale of new electric vehicles in the state of Wyoming be phased out by 2035.” The bill would also “[encourage] Wyoming’s industries and citizens to limit the sale and purchase of new electric vehicles in Wyoming.” So, no actual laws, just encouragements. Opening of the Wyoming bill.State of Wyoming”The Legislature would be saying, ‘If you don’t like our petroleum cars, well, we don’t like your electric cars,'” the resolution’s sponsor, Republican State Sen. Jim Anderson, told local media outlet the Cowboy State Daily. The publication reported late last year that Wyoming stands to get $24 million from the federal government to install EV charging stations in the state. If that all sounds like this might be a bit of a political stunt and not exactly a legitimate effort to improve the lives of everyday citizens, you’re on to something. The proposed bill’s “whereas” section is full of flowery love for the oil and gas industry, saying that extraction of these resources “has long been one of Wyoming’s proud and valued industries.” It also talks about how “the oil and gas industry in Wyoming has created countless jobs and has contributed revenues to the state of Wyoming throughout the state’s history.” But the state’s official assessment of the bill says it would have absolutely “no fiscal or personnel impact.”CC: State of CaliforniaIf that’s not clear enough for you, there is a third recommendation that would take effect if the bill becomes law. Under this section, the Secretary of State of Wyoming would be required to send copies of the resolution to President Biden and top federal officials, other Wyoming representatives in Washington, D.C., and, get this, the governor of California.That last line is important and, if you haven’t been paying attention, odd. Why would the governor of California care what Wyoming does with EV sales? He wouldn’t, but the bill’s Republican sponsors apparently want to score political points by bringing California into it. Last year, California announced it would ban the sale of gasoline-powered cars in the state by 2035, an actual rule that is already affecting laws in other states and the auto industry’s long-term planning. This Wyoming bill of encouragement? Not so much.It’s Happening, PeopleThis content is imported from poll. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site. More

From the puerile to the racist, thousands of offensive license plates were rejected by DMVs across the country last year, just as they do every year.Don’t look for LATE AF or WEED42O on any cars on the road, because vulgar phrases and drug and sex references were all caught and weeded out last year.We don’t mind the authorities making sure offensive internet meme jokes stay away from license plates, but we’re not as sure about rejected plates like GRLBOSS or EWWW G4S.There are limits, people. More than 750 car owners in Ohio submitted personalized license plates that the authorities at the state Bureau of Motor Vehicles denied. Hundreds more were attempted in Oregon. Down in Texas, over 5000 people tried last year to slip a few naughty words past the poor people at the DMV.The rules about what phrases or letter combinations are allowed or not allowed vary from state to state, but KHOU in Texas explains that the general rule is not to permit anything that could be considered indecent, vulgar or derogatory. Texas also states that plates referring to “race, ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation are also not allowed, whether they are derogatory or not.”You’re likely reading this with some curiosity about the potentially inappropriate and offensive language people tried to put on their plates, but we’re still going to issue a content warning for, well, potentially inappropriate and offensive language. So, be prepared, this list may get inappropriate AF.Speaking of which, the Cincinnati City Beat notes that one of the most commonly denied phrases in Ohio was people putting “AF” at the end of their plates, as in LATE AF, SALTY AF, and FINE AF. One Oregonian attempted MILFAF.Some of the rejected plates were a little too obvious—DOOKIE and POO BUTT, for example —but others must have given the submissions people at state DMVs a bit of a challenge to understand what the intended message was. Only the terminally online among us would understand why LIGMA is a problem, but the Oregon DOT caught it and labeled it “alarming, threatening, offending, or misleading.” We won’t reprint some of the racist labels, but you can believe they were attempted.PL8 Stories Oregon also said noTexas Department of Motor Vehicles does allow some symbols to be used on license plates, but it did not approve MAMACIT@, Y2*SLOW or BYE@H8RZ.Drug references were routinely caught, with BLAZIT, EM0420, and PHATT1 all making the lists. Turns out, using an “o” instead of a zero isn’t the foolproof plan that the person who submitted WEED42O thought it was. to R0LC0L as a configuration that refers to illegal acts.This content is imported from youTube. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.List: Personalized Texas license plates denied in 2022Watch onThere were a few rejected plates that would have made us smile in an unoffended way had they made their way to a driveway near you. GRLBOSS, for example, and EWWW G4S or L8YBUG, but the general attitude seems to be better safe than sorry. We’ll check back in a year from now to see what people tried to tell the world through government-issued metal plates in 2023.This content is imported from youTube. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site. More

Tesla’s pulling a page from In-N-Out Burger’s playbook and giving Model Y buyers the chance to order a cheaper variant off a proverbial secret menu. Though the automaker’s website currently restricts Model Y orders to those of the $54,380 Long Range or $58,380 Performance variants, Tesla’s list of online inventory shows that a number of its stores are stocked with salable base Model Y EVs that wear a starting price $2000 less than that of the Long Range model. (As of this writing, however, it seems most of these entry-level Ys in inventory include at least $2000 worth of optional 20-inch wheels and tires, thus effectively negating the base model’s cost savings over its Long Range counterpart.)SUZANNE CORDEIRO|Getty ImagesUnlike the prior entry-level rear-drive Model Y, which Tesla stopped producing in 2021, this new base-level Model Y comes standard with a dual-motor all-wheel-drive system. It also packs a greater EPA-rated range relative to its single-motor forebear. With up to 279 miles of driving range on a full charge, the cheapest Model Y variant betters the old Standard Range model’s range by 35 miles. That said, it falls short of the Model Y Long Range and Performance’s figures by up to 51 and 24 miles, respectively.SUZANNE CORDEIRO|Getty ImagesPowering the electric motors of this latest addition to the Model Y line is Tesla’s 4680 battery pack, which the company produces at its Texas plant. Though Tesla is mum on the pack’s rated capacity and other details, given the lesser range of Model Y’s equipped with this pack, it’s safe to assume the useable capacity of these batteries falls short of the 75.0-kWh pack that powered a 2020 Model Y Long Range we previously tested, which was EPA-rated to travel up to 316 miles on a full charge. We managed just 220 miles of range while testing the Model Y on our 75-mph highway test.Whether the range deficit of the base 2023 Model Y relative to its Long Range kin is worth its $2000 price reduction is a matter of personal preference. That said, the extra stacks in a base Model Y buyers’ pocket can go toward added options for their new EV or a lower monthly payment or paying off those gambling debts. Look, we’re not here to judge. We’re only here to let you know that Tesla offers its own version of an Animal Style burger for the Model Y.This content is imported from poll. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site. More