It appears "for all intents and purposes" is no longer a phrase.

Years ago, I worked for an IT consulting company that gave its workers the option of being full employees (with a standard benefits package including 401K, health insurance, paid time off, etc.) OR contractors who received no benefits, but a significantly higher wage. The client paid the same rate either way, the workers got to choose which arrangement worked best for them, and the consulting company (presumably) got their cut ... a true win-win.

I'm sure the trade-offs with Uber aren't exactly the same, but I still don't see why they can't offer their workers more than one option.

You're half right. Losing weight is about reducing your net caloric intake. That's calories in - calories out. In other words, you can eat less (fewer calories in) or move more (more calories out) or both.

Eating less works, yes, but it's certainly not the only way.

The patent office isn't part of the patent system??