This is solving the wrong problem because it is easier.
-Similar to the drunk looking for his car keys under the streetlight when he dropped them over by the car, because the light is better over here.

I have seen this reported on previously. It is a known issue... but stated really poorly here.

So the TLDR:

More CO2 in the atmosphere causes plants to grow a larger structure. It does not alter the amount of nutrients (vitamins, minerals) per plant. Resulting in more volume of edible material with a lower concentration of nutrients.

More calories with lower nutrient value is an unhealthy diet.

Those in power can choose to let members in favor (or their own party) get away with violations and punish those who are not.

A good example of letting it slide is Matt Gaetz. He was very clearly shielded from the consequences of his misdeeds. On the other hand, members of both parties have been forced out recently for violations.

It is all political. How bad does it look to let it slide vs how useful having the member owe leadership a favor...

This is an internal rule not a law.

It is enforceable via self-policing (committee investigates and votes on guilt and recommends penalties to the chamber). Like most rules violations, the penalties are variable (pay a fine? expulsion? somewhere in between?). The Senate Rules Committee can also quietly choose not to renew this rule at any time in the future.

It is a good thing... but don't read too much into it. It is a gesture.

huh... look at that.

ELDs are mandatory now. I remember when they were a thing for corporate-owned trucks, but now they are a requirement even in owner-operated trucks (except for older trucks made without one).

There is no auto-shutoff. There is auto-reporting. It would be a safety issue if the truck shut itself off. It will tattle on you tho!

The Great Replacement Theory

Once upon a time, this would have made him a prime target for a fatal accident -courtesy of the CIA.

...and not in a good position to pull out of their treaties with the neighbors surrounding them on all sides. I know this is specifically about the Schengen free-movement treaty, but it would be stupid of the EU to agree to let them pull out of select portions of their treaties while maintaining the free-trade portion of the agreements. You don't just get to unilaterally cancel the part of the agreement that benefits your neighbors, and keep the part that benefits you. They should expect to pay a heavy price for it.

Credit where credit is due.

This is good work. This type of abuse needs more enforcement. Penalties need to be more than a slap on the wrist, business as usual. Hopefully they at least lose their access to the program they abused.

In the USA, drivers maintain their own log books -and they lie about driving hours and breaks. They get paid to make a delivery, and faster deliveries earns more money. When they are stopped for an inspection they present their log books, and as long as it says they followed the laws, all is good. Nobody looks to closely at the numbers.

There have been a lot of ...challenges... to acquiring the right of way to build the damn thing. Everything from environmental challenges in court to local municipalities interfering. Every potential stakeholder has demanded special concessions for their unique benefit to allow the project to continue. Very little of the cost is related to engineering or construction.

It is still a massive clusterfuck.

Parents use screens to distract and occupy babies.

This is one of those “you scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not you could, you didn't stop to think if you should” kind of deals.

I am not looking for a more perfectly consistent coffee -according to some invented metric. I just want good coffee. It is not that hard to make good coffee. Leave it alone.

This sounds like an attempt to qualify what makes coffee coffee-like so that an artificial coffee substitute can be produced that meets minimum standards.

Let coffee be analog.

It is a jury of your peers. If all your peers hate you, that is a you problem.

The solution often applied is to move to a different venue where the locals do not know the parties involved. In this case that is not helpful, as both parties are known globally.

An alternative solution is to delay trial until the parties are out of the headlines -this one is common in criminal trials: wait until the crime is no longer headline news. Again, I doubt it would help with these two.

But back to the original point... it was their choice to go to court. It is their choice to be commonly disliked. Musk's unlikeable persona is his problem. Altman is better at seeming human. The verdict may hinge upon this.

This is actually in response to an EU regulation: Application developers must be identified to users -with contact information. Google is held responsible for enforcing this directive on Android and via the Play Store. Their method is blunt and heavy handed... but still required by law (in some form). An optional method was for Google to sign off on alternate app stores to maintain their own developer databases (and accept the lability instead of Google). There is no restriction on apps you install directly to your own device manually via ADB.