The only real difference is the drivetrain, and only enthusiasts really care about the technical differences in ICE drivetrains. Interiors, cargo capacity, reliability, fit and finish, ride quality, etc. will all still differ between BEVs.
E.g. NVH has been getting better pretty much every year despite the fact that car companies have been working on it for decades
You're right that the tech industry is by no means uniquely guilty for creating negative externalities or for the negative effects of capitalism in general. And while the other industries you mention have taken plenty of criticism over the past century or so (and continue to get it- it should be easy to find the equivalent negative take on Houston you're asking for, it just won't show up on the front of HN) there is a simple explanation the tech industry seems to be the biggest target: As the fastest growing segment of the US economy over the past decade, it's both the easiest to glorify and in turn the biggest target for condemnation.
There are maybe a few of other factors (some touched on in the article) that amplify the criticism if they aren't causal. The rate of change brought about by tech feels faster than others before it. Houston grew into a square of choking freeways with the oil industry; while SV has old roots the explosion happened in a couple of decades. The other factor is the concentration of the industry makes it a more tangible issue to the people effected. You can understand Big Oil is destroying the world but it's harder to picture than a Google bus in front of you in traffic.
I drive a Volvo S90. I only really use the "Pilot Assist" on the highway, and once you've driven it for a while you can get a sense ahead of time what situations it will fail in.
You're right though the biggest issue is still anticipating what other drivers are going to do. You need to override the system to stay out of people's blind spots or else you'll get cut off or worse. When you stay at a steady speed other drivers seem to forget your presence quicker.
They would have to pay the ISPs? It may well benefit them in the long run by increasing the size of their moats, but it will immediately affect their bottom lines.
That's on the client code. You can't stop callers from doing something stupid (or cosmic rays from flipping bits). At that point crashing fast is preferable.
For parameters where you aren't transferring ownership, just use raw pointers/references. If it's a required parameter make it a reference. If it's optional, use a pointer and check for null.
Creating objects in invalid states is definitely not idiomatic C++.
I do agree that people are a little too fearful of using bare pointers for optional references, if you're using a linter that will catch possible null dereferences it's often the most sensible technique.