Don't forget there are also interactions with consumers, who will now be deprived of the ability to purchase Tesla products. Alternatives include buying from Volvo, a Chinese-owned company who only recently got a few middling EV options to market. Consumers in Sweden may be fine having their purchasing options diminished out of solidarity with the union, but these actions do have consequences for consumers.

Have a look at the unionization rates in the Nordics. Taken together with the Nordic model: what do you think is going to matter more?

Or actually, let’s turn it around: do you think attacking the interests of a large portion of the working population is going to strengthen or weaken the Tesla brand?

This resonates with me. I also changed careers from law to tech. I went to law school because I wasn't sure what I wanted to do and got a full scholarship at a state school, so it was really the easy path. Looking back, I'd say at least 50% of my law school class went to law school because of similar career uncertainty. I imagine many of them are in the stereotypical: trapped in a middling legal career with a pile of debt following them around. There were a tiny minority who were truly passionate about law.

Fortunately, I found time during law school to get into software and robotics and transitioned into a tech career within about 18 months after graduation. My short legal career as a corporate M&A attorney was more than enough to convince me to take a risk and try something new. I never did any litigation work, but corporate legal work involves plenty of going through the motions - often late at night or on weekends to meeting some arbitrary timing imposed by a client. I was extremely fortunate to have a supportive partner, no kids, etc., so making a somewhat radical career move didn't involve all that much risk.

I have a few other friends who also moved from law to software and have done quite well. It could be selection bias, but I do think some of the discipline and diligence required to do well in law school translated nicely into coding and related technical disciplines.

FWIW, the ACIP meeting today shared that another ~7 cases were discovered. In a particular group - women between 30-39 - the numbers were more like 1 in 100k. Still very small odds, but greater than the "one in a million" widely quoted, particularly for certain age groups. Good coverage of the updated data today here: https://twitter.com/kakape/status/1385661019494699010

It appears this issue is exactly what the decision addressed. At issue was whether the definition of "aircraft" applied to the model aircraft that Mr. Pirker was flying. You're correct in stating that every aircraft, as defined under the regulations, must have FAA approval (in most cases, a COA). The judge concluded specifically that "aircraft as defined in 14 CFR Part 1, Section 1.1 does not include model aircraft.[1] The conclusion to be drawn is that the FAA approval process does not apply to model aircraft. This finding was in addition to finding that the FAA policies on model aircraft - including the ban on commercial use - are not legally enforceable.

[1]"Neither the Part 1, Section. 1.1, or the 49 U.S.C. Section 40102(a)(6) definitions of "aircraft" are applicable to, or include a model aircraft within their respective definition."

And one of the issues here is that the existing regulations didn't make much sense. The exact same aircraft that would be considered a model aircraft if you would fly as a hobbyist would suddenly be classified as a UAS the instant you took any payment to fly it.

So, I could go out to a field and zoom around a field and record footage to my heart's content and be completely kosher. But if my buddy decided it'd be neat to have a photo of his neighborhood and gives me $5 to fly over and snap one, I'm illegally operating a UAS. Absolutely nothing has changed in terms of what the aircraft is and the level of danger it does or does not pose.

If you plan on taking the money out of the company immediately, the LLC/S-Corp is better because the company doesn't pay any tax on that income – it "passes through" to the members as regular income. Therefore, it's only taxed one time. With a C-Corp, the corporation pays taxes on its income for the year, and any money paid out to the shareholder is taxed at 15%. Thus, the actual earnings of the corporation are subjected to double taxation, which the LLC/S-Corp can avoid. The potential problem with an LLC that he's referring to is that LLC members are taxed on their share of annual income, whether or not it is actually distributed out.