Meant to reply to poster below.

Thereâ(TM)s a reason for this. Using copper pipe for an RO system would end up leaching the copper from the pipe. Not only would the pipe lose its integrity over time but youâ(TM)d have heavy metals in the water. Those pex lines youâ(TM)re referring to are extremely safe and do not leach.

It's incredible.

They are a public company, and its activities were all detailed in its prospectus pre-IPO. Everything they've done has been with regulations in mind. They review every single project they list to ensure they are compliant. ... they aren't some fly-by-night exchange. you'll see, the SEC isn't going to win this.

None of your points are correct or even relevant to what I wrote. You aren't worth responding to. Good luck in life.

Your lack of understanding is reflected in the quality of your questions. I'll entertain.

Real-world problems that the technology solves:
1) Fast, secure peer-to-peer payment methods that are not subject to the same fees as traditional payment methods
2) Financial Inclusion is a big one - do you know how many unbanked people exist worldwide? Get out of your bubble. Over a billion people on this planet do not have access to a bank account, never mind a loan.
3) Identity Verification - A decentralized method of verifying a person's identity that is tamper-proof. This helps address identity fraud/theft.
4) DeFi - Decentralized Finance enables people to participate in economies without financial intermediaries. If you understand what risk is in terms of counterparty default, then you can understand the importance of this.

There are more uses - supply chain management, anti-counterfeiting technology, tamper proof voting systems.

Think before you speak man.

You have no idea what you're talking about. Gensler's own words state that he sees no need for further regulation. They (SEC) are playing predator and trying to use existing regulations to cannibalize the industry players as they see fit. 'Artificial scarcity that people could bet on' - What are you even discussing? Cryptographically secure, distributed ledger technology is a game-changing solution for many real-world problems. We're talking about introducing decentralized finance to the unbanked, and you're sitting here talking about how its time has passed?

What has happened to the critical thinkers and innovators of the world?

Are you kidding? COIN was served a wells notice from the SEC. As a public company, the wells notice has impacted its prospects and ability to do business. COIN has done everything on the up and up, and the SEC has been a regulatory predator. Do some reading, and you'll see that Gensler is on the wrong side of this and has been for a long time.

It saddens me how much /. has deteriorated over the years. Few of you know what you are talking about. The hate on for crypto is ubiquitous and palpable, with no arguments of substance. Anyone involved in crypto, involved on the regulatory side, can see plain as day that the SEC has been playing both sides to their advantage. They are at the point where they are nothing but a regulatory predator, looking for the next entity they can fine into oblivion - mandate be damned. They don't protect consumers. I don't care whether a person is pro or anti-crypto but wake the hell up to what the SEC is doing. You should all be cheering for COIN right now as they are on the right side of the spirit of the law and regulation.

Youâ(TM)re on crack if you think Trudeau has handled this well

IBM is working on something like this, a 'neuromorphic' chip: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08...

Unless Joda Time supports it ... I'm not interested!

I completely agree with you. Market forces combined with technological adaptations that maintain 'organic' status (i.e. taking advantage of vertical space and urban landscapes) can easily make up for this lost efficiency.

Alcatel-Lucent, the old Bell Labs

Companies can NOT simply add 'organic' as a label their product. It does mean something and can be used if the product does not meet specific criteria.

If you want to claim: "Organic" (or a similar statement):

Your product: Must contain at least 95% organic ingredients, not counting added water and salt.

Must not contain added sulfites.

May contain up to 5% of:

      1. non-organically produced agricultural ingredients which are not commercially available in organic form; and/or
      2. other substances allowed by 7 CFR 205.605.

Your label MUST:

Show an ingredient statement.

List the organic ingredients as "organic" when other organic labeling is shown.

1 Water and salt included as ingredients must not be identified as organic. (IS)

Show below the name and address of the handler (bottler, distributor, importer, manufacturer, packer, processor, etc.) of the finished product, the statement:

        "Certified organic by ___" or similar phrase, followed by the name of the Certifying Agent. Certifying Agent seals may not be used to satisfy this requirement. (IP)

Your label MAY show:

The term "Organic" to modify the product name. (PDP/IP/OP)

"X% organic" or "X% organic ingredients." (PDP/IP/OP)

The USDA Organic seal and/or certifying agent seal(s). (PDP/OP)

The certifying agent business/Internet address or telephone number. (IP)

1 To identify an ingredient as organically produced, in the ingredients statement, use the word, "organic" in conjunction with the name of the ingredient, or an asterisk or other reference mark which is defined below the ingredient statement.