Equivalent usage to a farm, maybe. But it's not a farm. Part of the challenge and conflict about these water rights is that actual farms have priority leases, lasting around 100 years. Cities can't negotiate drinking water increases, because the farms have priority.
Data centers (and other industrial projects) are at the back of the line. They're welcome to build their own pipelines, or truck it in, or build a desalination plant. But that river is already spoken for.
If it was evidence, they fucked up BIG TIME if their actions weren't read-only from the beginning. A distress password would be an attempt at destruction of evidence, but completely unsuccessful.
TBH, it makes perfect sense. If you don't want to be subject to the laws of California (or whatever state/city/country), you need to genuinely not be there. This is true as a resident or a business.
It doesn't surprise me at all that people want the benefits of living in California without the obligations.
Entrapment has a very specific definition, and this ain't it.
It might still be an illegal speed limit change, but that's going to depend on an awful lot of details. It's certainly bad design, but the locals probably like it for the money it brings in.
She probably used it earlier, but not necessarily. She might not have a good place to set her phone in her car.
She might have used it earlier, at a time where it was legal. For instance, setting navigation or music before driving. Or (depending on local laws) while stopped at a light.
I'm a sane world, removing the brake pedal (etc) would only occur after extended disuse. When the technology is mature enough and so reliable that it's a wasted feature that never gets used, and hasn't been used in a long time.
Not when the technology is brand new and this is something still needed on a regular basis.
How did they get to unveiling without anyone reviewing the design? Or did everyone inside Ferrari sign off on it as being acceptable?
"solar-powered cars" have been tried many times because it's a great headline, but the math never works. Cars simply don't have enough surface area to capture a lot of solar power. The amount of energy is low enough to not be worthwhile, except in the most extreme edge cases.
There's already precedent that you cannot be forced to give up your passwords. It's a 5th amendment violation. But I'm not sure if it applies to this case or not.