I'm not sure how this would "fix" the problems with Bitcoin. It would change perception perhaps but the damage has largely already been done to make it nothing more than speculative and difficult to ground in real world currencies.

Yes it is extremely broad. And as it is right now, the IRS could use it to go after crypto miners.

I think it's more likely that changes are made to that part of the bill to make it more specific before it reaches the courts.

It's more likely the SEC will go after entities the resemble "brokers"

Think things like Uniswap and a bunch of other Defi players.

They always put out literature on how to comply and give companies time to do so.

So they won't go after anyone as long as they abide by the laws

Whichever other countries have the infrastructure to support the required hardware. That's going to keep dwindling if this goes through and other countries follow suit.

"Policygenius can help you compare renters insurance policies to find the right coverage for you, at the right price" and the link for renters insurance goes to recommendations for renter's insurance. This here is sponsored content. They are using an article about somebody being horribly maimed to sell renter's insurance. Because you can use it to pay off your immense student debts. This is awful

The metaphor works for some scenarios like crypto. It definitely doesn't apply to the rise of Pixar

That would help but there seems to be no incentive to push anti-trust efforts. Otherwise these mega corporations wouldn't exist in their current behemoth forms. I think public outcry would need to be strong enough to pressure antitrust action, but people tend to be fine with it since less companies makes access to their media more simple and streamlined

I also think a lot of people aren't aware of the situation, since each company has a multiple of different brands under their umbrella. And it doesn't hurt that since these companies control so much of the media they can, at least in theory, suppress any press that might result in such public outry.

I guess we have the OP's article as something available in public media. The infographics are useful for giving a basic idea of how many media companies are under each corporate umbrella. There needs to be more of an understanding about why trusts and near monopolies like these are going to just get worse as they continue to merge to compete against each other's super Chimera. The fact that these companies own intellectual properties that the public wants to consume may make them more willing to turn a blind eye though. There would need to be an event that causes significant anger in the public to inspire outcry. Not just knowledge.

That's depressingly accurate. US infrastructure is so bad.I went to Austin a month ago and there are a lot of highways outside of the main city. Biking along those roadways sounds insane.

Thanks!

The worst part about it is that that instability is on public display every time we get another battery fire. It shakes American confidence in EVs when it's the country that most desperately needs to adapt non-fossil fuel cars at a higher rate. I wish we knew more about the implementation process...

So accompany every battery fire report with reports of all the fossil fuel fires in the same period.

Perfectionism is the worst enemy. You pretend to be an ally but then treat any failure as a total disaster.

Okay then. Tell me what you think can be done to increase the adoption of EVs in the United States?

Give fuel fires the same coverage as EV fires. Every gas station catching on fire or exploding. Every car spontaneously catching fire. Every home burned down because a fuel burning vehicle caught fire in the garage.

Just give proportional air time to incidents based on fires per vehicle.

This one BEV got half an hour of air time during the week? Why aren’t there a hundred hours of fuel burning vehicles catching fire?

This one BEV came off the road at high speed, hit a tree and all the occupants died? Why aren’t there an equal number of minutes for the non-BEV fatal single vehicle accidents?

I think employers should be open to what works best for each employee. I am currently WFH but I do server work so I do occasionally need to go to the office for configuring or picking up equipment. I would be okay with doing a hybrid option because of that. If I had to go back to the office full time, I would definitely start looking elsewhere.

Pretty much agreed-- I can understand wanting new/junior employees to develop a good track record before complete WFH. But it also seems reasonable to let a new hire that might otherwise have to relocate across the country that level of freedom and simply deal with the issue if they don't produce: not much different than how you'd deal with a new in-person employee.

I will say that, for myself, I understand my work behavior very well. If I could choose any style, it wouldn't be complete WFH. It would be 3 days WFH, 2 days in office. Just a quirk of my personality that I tend to be more focused in the office, and the time I spend there gives me a fairly regimented view of what I need to accomplish during WFH time.

Which is completely what you said: do what worked best for each employee.