I don't know. Why don't you ask TekSavvy?

They have a similar name. Perhaps they have a similar policy.

This!

Why not a simple odometer reading? They come up with some algorithm that computes statistically what percentage of odometer usage translates into Oregon road usage... and then just apply that. No privacy concerns. You drive further... you're taxed more. Simple.

Exactly, just last week I was reading about a proposed Canadian mine that was vetoed by the native council, not due to environmental concerns, but because of uncertainty over environmental impact in the future because current and projected prices didn't actually support opening the mine in the near term but the company looking for approval was looking for a 50 year lease on the land. If Russia ties up a lot of the world supply and shuts down mines they own then the price will rise and mines like that one will come online, it's not like they're going to take over so much of the world supply that we'll be shutting down reactors due to lack of fuel. The real fear I'm sure is that Westinghouse and GE and their suppliers will have to pay more for yellowcake in order to produce their overpriced fuel rods.

And then the Intern goes to Ask Slashdot, and we start the whole thing over.

It's some kind of Internception.

I'm not even going to start answering that, but I am curious about one thing.

Which major corporation are you the CIO for? Please be honest, as I stand to win $20 here.

Don't worry folks. I always carry around a copy of "Atlas Shrugged" for hitting people like this on the head at times like these.

Probably have to keep receipts and get a refund from the DOT office running the trial program.

Since it's primarily weight per axle that determines the wear caused on the roads, and the point of the tax is to maintain roads, it seems logical that heavier vehicles, whether they be SUV's or big sedans like the Tesla, should be charged more. It's not like a Leaf is particularly heavy (it's basically the same weight as the similarly sized Chevy Cruze).

Uh, most workplaces aren't going to be happy if a coworker walks by and you have a GNAA troll or similar up on your screen...

That would be this morning. Any other questions?

Um, because they use pens and paper at home too. Any more?

That's funny. When "the tools" are a pen and paper, the tools aren't so important and learning can actually be any time, any where. It's when you try to artificially tie the act of thinking to having a Microsoft(tm) Device(tm) connected to the Cloud(tm) that you lose the ability to "do work anywhere".

This is my lawn. You may get off of it now. You are dismissed.

Licensed, legitimate, crab companies also use the high barrier of entry in many places to keep out competitors in order to artificially inflate prices. They lobby like crazy to make sure that things stay the way they have been.

I think it's interesting that people take this stance against Uber. I thought "we" usually like the upstart guys that are overthrowing established monopolies...

Don't cry for the cab companies...

The summary makes it sound like all of the bills are AGAINST ride sharing... but that's not the case. For instance, in Massachusetts(which is highlighted in the summary) Uber is actively campaigning FOR the regulation bill.

Why?

Because the bill states once and for all that ride sharing is a legal activity. Yes, it puts some protections in place: but not much beyond what Uber already provides.

As someone that uses Uber quite a bit (2-3 times per month) I welcome the new legislation as long as it allows Uber to continue to operate. Regulation is not all bad, as long as it is fair and reasonable.

Nah - should've given him the citation :)

When the bottoms fall out of the fiat currencies,

Most people will be dead as it will be the result of total war. Nothing else is going to rock the worldwide markets so thoroughly that all 6 major reserve currencies have their value evaporated.