Elon Musk’s rebrand of Twitter seems to be underway. In a series of late-night tweets Saturday, Musk shared that the company’s famous bird logo and name would soon be no more. The company, it seems, will simply be known as “X.”

“And soon we shall bid adieu to the twitter brand and, gradually, all the birds,” he tweeted. He later said in a Twitter space that the Twitter logo would be changed Sunday. “It should have been done a long time ago, sorry it took so long,” he said.

Later that night, he reportedly emailed employees about the change. According to Platformer’sZoe Schiffer, Musk emailed staff saying the company would become X and that his note “was the last email he’ll ever send from a Twitter email address.”

Twitter didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.

It’s long been known that Musk favors the “X” branding. The banking startup he co-founded in 1999 was called x.com, and his recently-announced Ai venture is called xAI. And Twitter’s holding company was rammed to X Corp in April. Musk has also talked about how X would help Twitter become an “everything app.” Though Musk has offered few specifics on this vision, many believe he’s referencing apps like WeChat, the most popular app in China that people use for a host of everyday activities, like payments and shopping, in addition to social networking.

Still, officially abandoning the Twitter brand could be a risky move for Musk. The company is already facing an advertiser exodus that’s resulted in a loss of more than half the company’s ad revenue. A rebrand could further alienate advertisers. At the same time, Musk may be betting that a new name and identity could help the company shed its ties to its former leadership and the decisions made under them, both of which he has been deeply critical of.

Despite decades of focusing our national infrastructure on personal vehicles (often at the direct exclusion and expense of other modes of transport), modern folks gets around on far more than planes, trains and automobiles these days. With our city streets and suburban neighborhoods increasingly populated by an ever-widening variety of vehicle — from e-scooters to city bikes, to autonomous EV taxis and internal combustion SUVs. The task of accommodating these competing priorities ensuring that everybody in town, regardless of physical or financial ability, can get where they're going is growing ever more challenging. 

Inclusive Transportation: A Manifesto for Divided Communities, by civil engineer Veronica O Davis, highlights the many failings (both procedural and structural) of America's transportation infrastructure and calls on city planners to reexamine how their public works projects actually affect the people they are intended to serve. Davis deftly agues in favor of a systemic revolution to the transportation planning field demanding better and more functional training for civil engineers, more diverse voices in transportation planning projects, and undoing at least some of the community-dividing harms that America's past love affair with freeways has wrought. In the excerpt below, Davis examines the relative successes of Washington DC's Vision Zero road safety program.  

Island Press

From Inclusive Transportation by Veronica O. Davis. Copyright © 2023 Veronica O. Davis.

Reevaluating Transportation Policies

Policies lay the foundation for many decisions. For example, I worked with a city that had a policy that the curb-to-curb space could not be expanded unless there were extenuating circumstances, and even then the answer was no. That meant the roadway could not be expanded, but we could do a “road diet,” or narrowing of the roadway. As an example, if a road was sixty feet wide from curb to curb, all we had was sixty feet to work with as we developed alternatives to move the growing number of people moving into the corridor. The city’s policy decision was “Work with what you have, and if we are going to spend money to reconstruct the road, it will not be to widen it.”

Vision Zero could be a path forward as an overall framework for changing policy priorities, but it needs to be more than a plan, and it needs to be crafted with the people. Vision Zero is a concept from Sweden that recognizes we are human and we will make mistakes, but our mistakes should not lead to serious injuries or fatalities. One thing that gets muddled as people in the United States attempt to adopt Vision Zero is conflation of the total number of crashes with the total number of crashes that lead to deaths and serious injuries. Vision Zero does not demand perfect records, and it recognizes that crashes will occur because we are human. Instead, it argues that the focus should be on deaths and serious injuries. The distinction is important because crashes generally happen all over a community and people walk away from fender benders and sideswipes with minor or no injuries. Other than having a bad day, everyone is alive to recount the drama with their family and friends. But the more severe crashes tend to cluster in certain communities. If you focus on crashes regardless of the resulting injury, you may move resources from communities that need them more because they are where people are dying.

The Vision Zero plan of Washington, DC, is a great example of both successful interactions and some shortcomings. In 2015, only a few US cities embraced Vision Zero. DC’s plan was one of the first in the United States that included extensive outreach during the plan’s development. Over the course of a summer, we had ten meetings on street corners around the city, a youth summit with over two hundred young people, two meetings with special advocacy groups, and meetings with over thirty-five city agencies. We did not just inform people; we also engaged with them and used their feedback and stories to shape the plan. As an example, after talking with a group of young Black teens at the youth summit, we removed all enforcement related to people walking and biking. The young people conveyed to us that sometimes crossing the street mid-block got them away from a group of people who may want to cause them harm. The teens weighed their risk of being targeted by violence as higher than their risk of being struck by someone driving a vehicle.

In addition, we heard from people that having police enforce laws related to walking and biking put the community and law enforcement in conflict with each other. Charles T. Brown has documented in his research for his podcast Arrested Mobility how laws such as those prohibiting jaywalking are disproportionately enforced in Black and Brown communities, for men in particular. In DC’s Vision Zero plan, enforcement was instead targeted to dangerous driving behavior such as excessive speeding, driving under the influence, distracted driving, and reckless driving.

In a world where we are examining policing more closely after George Floyd’s murder, I think plans that reexamine equity in this way should take one more step. DC’s Vision Zero plan correctly focused on behaviors that lead to deaths and fatalities. However, the plan should have recommended a comprehensive evaluation of all the transportation laws and the removal of any that were not supported by data or did not lead to safer streets. If we are discussing data-driven approaches, the laws should target behaviors that lead to crashes that result in deaths and serious injuries.

Moreover, this plan offered recommendations and strategies and did not go further. After the Vision Zero plan was shared, communities were all demanding safer streets. This calls to mind the discussion [in chapter 2] of Montgomery County and the tension about who would get resources. All streets could be safer, even if incrementally, and without guiding principles for more of an “emergency room” structure. DC’s Vision Zero program led to resources going to where there was advocacy but not necessarily to the areas that needed the investment the most. If you have an opportunity similar to this, I emphasize the importance of putting in a framework that allocates resources to communities and areas experiencing high rates of fatalities and serious injuries, which tend to be the areas with high numbers of Black, Latino, or low-income residents or all of these.

Ever since Strange New Worlds’ second season was announced, the big draw has been the crossover episode with animated sitcom Lower Decks. It would see Tawny Newsome (Mariner) and Jack Quaid (Boimler) taking their until-now animated characters into live action. Following an early screening at Comic-Con, the episode is now available to watch on Paramount Plus.

The following article contains spoilers for “Those Old Scientists.”

There’s an SNL sketch where William Shatner, as himself, exhorts a room full of Star Trek fans to “Get a Life!” It’s clearly intended in jest, given Shatner’s barely-suppressed smile and a twist where Phil Hartman’s manager forces him to instantly recant his rant. Depending on who you ask, the sketch was either taken in the spirit it was intended, or with outrage amongst fans who felt mischaracterized, and misunderstood. But it’s this dichotomy, between the legend and the truth that’s mined for laughs in “Those Old Scientists,” the crossover episode between Strange New Worlds and Lower Decks. Well, that and an affectionate elbow in the ribs suggesting that we could all do with being a bit less obsessive.

The (animated) beta shift is making a routine survey of a long-dormant time-travel portal, while Boimler and Tendi argue about who discovered it. Boimler brags it was found by Starfleet, but Tendi says it was Orion scientists, once again trying to dispel myths that all Orions are pirates. While messing around Boimler is standing on the portal when Rutherford accidentally sets it running, throwing him back in time. When he arrives on the other side, he’s now in the live action world of Strange New Worlds, and is greeted by Spock, Una and La’an. And with that, we’re into an animated version of the title sequence, complete with nacelle-sucking alien.

On the Enterprise, Boimler can’t help but express his shock, surprise and generally fanboy out in front of his heroes. He gets lectured by La’an about not polluting the timeline and, thanks to her adventure in “Tomorrow, Tomorrow and Tomorrow,” not getting attached. But, since this is the Boimler we know and love, he can’t help but throw spoilers out left, right and center. Not to mention his insistence on pointing out the difference between the history as he knows it, and the storylines as they’re presently unfolding on Strange New Worlds. For instance, he’s mightily disturbed by the fact that Spock – happy in a relationship with Chapel – is laughing, smiling and generally acting like he’s in love. After all, the Spock he knows – his Spock – isn’t this outwardly emotional, because that’s what the legend tells us. It’s almost as if he’s a stand-in for the sort of obsessive fan who tries to police the borders of what Star Trek is, instead of enjoying the journey.

At the same time, the Enterprise has to deal with an Orion vessel with undetermined intentions which then steals the time portal. Boimler urges Pike to be diplomatic, but winds up forcing him to trade a supply of much-needed triticale grain to get it back. Pike sees this – and the forced relocation of a planet-full of starving colonists – as preferable to having this guy on his ship any longer. When the portal is active and back in position, the Enterprise crew ready to get rid of this purple-haired irritation, Mariner leaps through, bravely declaring that she’s coming to the rescue. Except, the hardware had power enough for just one trip, and there’s not a fuel source available anywhere else in the quadrant. Leaving an eye-rolling Pike with the unwelcome possibility that they’re stuck with the Cerritos’ pair for good.

Boimler and Mariner wind up spending some time with their heroes, until they eventually realize that the Enterprise itself has a supply of fuel. Thanks to the naval tradition of using a component from the previous vessel in the construction of the next one, they can refine a chunk of NX-01 into fuel which can be used to send the pair home. (But not before the Strange New Worlds crew can reveal that they, too, are secretly as nerdy as a bunch of fans of their predecessors from Enterprise as Boimler is for this era.) They meet with the Orions again, and Pike pledges to claim that the Orions discovered the portal, giving their burgeoning science ship a small chunk of credit. And when Boimler and Mariner leap back to the future, the Enterprise crew drink an Orion cocktail that, in the closer, renders them all as animated characters.

“Those Old Scientists” is as pure a dose of fan service as Star Trek has ever produced, and I mean that as both a compliment and a criticism. Plenty of the elements, including the animated title sequence, reached straight into the lizard part of my brain and left me grinning like a loon. The screenplay, credited to Lower Decks’ executive story editor Kathryn Lyn and Bill Wolkloff, is crammed full of great gags. It helps, too, that Strange New Worlds has enough comic talent in its ranks to play an episode like this, and Carol Kane steals the show with the best gag in the episode.

But, and there is a but, the episode is a bit like cotton candy in that once the initial hit of sugar leaves your tongue, there’s little else here. We get a lot of scenes of Boimler and then Mariner telling the Enterprise crew how great they are, or are seen as such, by their successors. Most of these scenes take place sitting around desks, bars or lounges – telling rather than showing. I know that this is Strange New Worlds, and so the narrative will always belong with this crew rather than its guest stars. But the lower deckers are rendered passive observers in a narrative that could, or should, really have enabled them to demonstrate the dynamism they have in their own show. In the moment where Boimler and Mariner try to solve things on their own, they’re instantly shut down by La’an and Uhura and told to sit back on the bench. The worst served by this is Tawny Newsome, who is absent a major chunk of the episode and has little to do when Mariner does finally arrive in the past.

That cotton candy metaphor is probably the best way to sum up “Those Old Scientists,” a goofy snack between meatier meals, or episodes, either side. The fact it exists at all is a joy, even if it’s not as wonderful as it could have been, and I’d love nothing more than to see more forays into the real world by the Lower Decks crew. At the very least, with Strange New Worlds and Lower Decks in production at the same time, it’s a great time to be a Star Trek fan.

At one point Christopher Nolan's Oppenheimer, the father of the atomic bomb dons his iconic uniform — a fedora cap, a smoking pipe, a slightly over-sized suit — like Batman wearing his cape and cowl for the first time. It's a look that serves as a sort of armor against mere mortals, who he woos with a peculiar charisma, as well as the military and political bureaucracy he battles while leading the Manhattan Project. It's also a way for Oppenheimer (played by Cillian Murphy) to ground himself as he wrestles with the major conflict around his work: Building an atomic bomb could help to the war, but at what cost to humanity?

Oppenheimer may seem like a curious project for Nolan: Since wrapping up his Batman trilogy with The Dark Knight Rises, he's thrown himself into increasingly complex projects (perhaps to atone for that disappointment). Interstellar was ostensibly a story about a man exploring the cosmos to find a new planet for humanity, but it also wrestled with personal sacrifices as his children aged beyond him.

Universal Pictures

Dunkirk was a purely cinematic, almost dialog-free depiction of a famous wartime evacuation. And Tenet was a bold attempt at mixing another heady sci-fi concept (what if you could go backwards through time?!) with bombastic James Bond-esque set pieces. Oppenheimer, meanwhile, is a mostly talky film set in a variety of meeting rooms, save for one explosive sequence.

Take a step back, though, and a film about an intelligent and very capable man wrestling with huge moral issues is very much in the Nolan wheelhouse. Oppenheimer's swaggering genius fits right alongside Christian Bale's Bruce Wayne/Batman, the dedicated magicians in The Prestige or the expert dream divers/super spies in Inception.

The film, which is based on the biography American Prometheus by Martin J. Sherwin and Kai Bird, follows Oppenheimer from his time in Germany as a doctoral student, to his professorship at UC Berkeley. He mingles with notable scientists, including Albert Einstein himself, and makes a name for himself as a quantum physics researcher. We see Oppenheimer as more than just a bookish geek: He sends money to anti-fascists fighting in the Spanish Civil War, he pushes for unionization among lab workers and professors, and he supports local Communists. (Something that will come back to haunt him later.)

It's not too long before he's recruited to the Manhattan Project to build an atomic bomb, and the myth-making truly begins. Like a Nolan heist film, he assembles a team of the brightest scientific minds in America and beyond, and he pushes the government to establish a town doubling as a secret research base in Los Alamos, New Mexico. The film is strongest when it focuses on the specificities of the Manhattan Project: the rush to build a bomb before Nazi Germany, the pushback from scientists terrified about the damage "the gadget" could do.

Universal Pictures

The movie firmly focuses on Oppenheimer's point of view, so much so that we mainly see him as a heroic tortured genius. Only he can put the right scientists together and motivate them to work; only he can solve the riddles of quantum physics to keep America safe. Some colleagues criticize his cavalier attitude about building an atomic bomb — they think it can lead to untold disaster, while he naively thinks it may be so powerful it may end all war. But, for the most part, we're left feeling that he was a great man who was ultimately betrayed by a country that didn't care for his post-war anti-nuclear activism.

I wasn't able to see Oppenheimer on an IMAX screen, unfortunately, but sitting front row in a local theater still managed to be a thoroughly immersive experience. That was particularly surp—rising since it's really a movie featuring people (mostly men) talking to each other in a series of unremarkable rooms. Save for one virtuoso set piece — the build-up and aftermath of a successful atomic bomb test is Nolan at his best — what's most impressive is how cinematographer Hoyte Van Hoytema makes those conversations utterly engaging. We've never seen Cillian Murphy's piercing blue eyes do so much work in close-up.

Universal Pictures

Still, it's an overall disjointed experience. The few featured women — Emily Blunt as Kitty Oppenheimer, Florence Pugh as the Communist activist Jean Tatlock — are sketched thin, even by Nolan standards. And the movie would have benefitted from more insight into Oppenheimer's thinking. It's a surprisingly standard biopic, even though it's three hours long and far more technical than any studio film this year.

At the very least, it would have been interesting to see Oppenheimer reckon more directly with the aftermath of the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. We see him confront President Harry Truman (Gary Oldman) in a vain attempt to stop building nuclear weapons, and the film points to his very public stance against future bombs. But even those scenes feel self-serving.

At the end of the film, Oppenheimer finally comes to understand something many of his colleagues have been saying from the beginning. Nothing will be the same because of him. There is no peace now, only the undying specter of nuclear annihilation.

ExpressVPN has become a household name – or at least as close to one as a VPN is likely to get – taking over mainstream advertisements on sites like YouTube. On our roundup of the nine top providers in June, it came out tops for streaming services, frequent travel and gaming. But, notably, it wasn’t the overall best, falling short on areas like security and user friendliness.

There are three main VPN use cases on top of general security: geoblocking, streaming and gaming. That means my tests looked like watching Shrek on the clock, by using a VPN to access Canadian Netflix from my US-based home office, where the ogre movie isn’t currently available.

ExpressVPN was easy to sign up for, download and use, but compared to the other services, it didn't wow me. Competitors like ProtonVPN, for example, had easier ways to sign in across platforms. But an ExpressVPN subscription does come with a password manager to store and autofill credentials across websites. That’s a plus in a world where complex passwords are crucial to keeping your accounts secure.

The best VPNs stay out of your way and you'll barely even notice they’re running. But one oddity was that ExpressVPN internet speeds outperformed our baseline internet speed measures. The service is likely circumventing traffic shaping by the internet service provider or a similar anomaly because every other VPN will hurt internet speed in some way. But it did successfully mask the IP address, and pass the DNS and WebRTC leak tests as privacy measures.

ExpressVPN

It was also easy to access geo-blocked content using ExpressVPN, with little-to-no buffering. There were some loading delays that only lasted a few seconds when I tried to stream the news on YouTube using ExpressVPN, but no lag came up after that. Finally, ExpressVPN passed the gaming test by avoiding lag and maintaining a normal loading time. Although, it was a pretty basic test where I logged into online game Slither.io from a UK-based VPN to play the worm-eating competition with international users. Surfing the web with ExpressVPN was just as easy as being online without it. With ExpressVPN, a ping test measured how long data takes to travel from the computer to the server and back at 100 milliseconds, versus 16 milliseconds with no VPN turned on.

ExpressVPN’s biggest perk is that it supports up to five devices at once. That means I could conduct all tests simultaneously and still had no slowdown. That’s great for sharing it with a family, or folks that like to game, watch TV and scroll on their phone at the same time. It’s the main reason ExpressVPN landed as our top choice for streaming and gaming. The connectivity was solid, it had a wide range of servers in 94 countries and provided clear instructions on configuration for any device.

But security-wise, I found myself wanting more. ExpressVPN is based in the British Virgin Islands, which the company touts because the territory lacks any foreign intelligence operations and does not participate in 14 Eyes intelligence-sharing agreements. But it is owned by Kape Technologies, which also owns competitor CyberGhost, and Kape has a problematic history that includes spreading malware. Not only that, in 2021, the Department of Justice charged ExpressVPN CIO Daniel Gericke for cyberspying activities on behalf of the UAE. ExpressVPN stood by the CIO in a blog post.

But it’s not all bad. ExpressVPN publicly shared security audits of its mobile apps, protocol and desktop apps last year. That’s a win for security transparency. Still, a 2021 Consumer Reports study found that ExpressVPN didn’t support multifactor authentication, did not meet brute force mitigation checks and retained some data even after an account was terminated. ExpressVPN did, however, exceed industry standards in protections against unauthorized access, implement a vulnerability disclosure program and said it would not pursue legal action against security researchers. That means when it comes to security standards and practices, ExpressVPN as a company has a few too many misses and not enough hits.

I recommended ExpressVPN as our top choice for gamers, frequent travelers and heavy users of streaming services because it lets users access a wide range of locations from a variety of devices with high speed connections and no lag. With options to configure directly to routers and gaming consoles, it’s a solid choice for people that put a lot of strain on their ISPs. Still, there are better VPNs for the security-minded or those who want something more affordable.

Tesla has started notifying owners that they can transfer the Full Self-Driving (FSD) feature they purchased to a new vehicle, as long as they take delivery within the next three months. During the automaker's Q2 2023 investor call, Elon Musk announced a "one-time amnesty" that will allow owners to transfer their FSD. Now, Twitter user Keith Dahlenburg has posted a screenshot (via Not A Tesla App, The Verge) of the offer, along with its rules and conditions. 

Perhaps the most pertinent condition is that owners can only take advantage of this one-time amnesty if they take delivery of a new Tesla vehicle between July 20th and September 30th, 2023. It can't be applied retroactively, so those who've taken delivery before and after those dates unfortunately have to pay for access again. And FSD doesn't come cheap — Tesla raised its price to $15,000 last year. That's an enormous price jump for early adopters who were able to snag the feature for $5,000 years ago. Now, they can get a new model without having to pay for the feature again. 

Owners who choose to take the transfer offer will have to forfeit the capability in their current vehicle. Tesla will remove FSD from their old EV up to a week before their scheduled delivery date, and they can't get it back even if they cancel their purchase for a new car. That said, Tesla also doesn't guarantee delivery by the time the promo is over, so owners could still miss the offer if their deliveries unfortunately get delayed. 

Twitter has again made its platform a little less usable for people who choose not to pay for a Blue subscription. The company has announced that it will soon implement a new rule that puts a limit on the number of DMs unverified accounts can send per day. In a tweet, Twitter said the change is part of its efforts to reduce spam in direct messages, which has seen a sharp uptick recently. 

On July 14th, the website added a new message setting that sends DMs from accounts people follow to their primary inbox and DMs from verified users they don't follow to their message request inbox. Twitter said it saw a 70 percent reduction in spam messages a week after the new setting came out. Before that, the website limited the ability to send DMs to people who don't follow them to Blue subscribers only. 

While Twitter said the upcoming change is meant to reduce DM spam, it's still another move that not-so-subtly pushes unverified subscribers towards paying for Blue membership. In fact, the website's announcement about it explicitly tells people to "subscribe today to send more messages" and includes a link to the subscription page. Twitter also previously put a strict cap on how many tweets a day a user can see, with unverified accounts being limited to 600 posts. 

Elon Musk tweeted this month that Twitter is suffering from an ongoing negative cash flow, because its advertising revenue has dropped by 50 percent. Even if money from subscriptions can't make up for that, it's still money in the company's pocket. 

When OpenAI released a ChatGPT app for the iPhone in May, it promised that Android users will get theirs soon. Now, the company has announced that ChatGPT for Android is rolling out to users sometime next week. Moreover, its Google Play listing is already up, and users can pre-register to get it as soon as it becomes available. 

It's unclear if the app will initially only be available in the US like the iPhone app, but I was able to pre-order it from Asia. OpenAI expanded the iOS app's reach to more regions just a few days after it was released, so the Android app will most likely be accessible in other countries soon even if it does launch only in the US. 

People can already access ChatGPT on Android through a browser, but the interface, while not exactly difficult to navigate, isn't ideal for mobile devices. A dedicated app means an interface optimized for mobile, as well as features tailored for users on the platform. iOS users, for instance, got support for Siri and Shortcuts in June. They can create a ChatGPT prompt in Shortcuts and save it as a link to send to friends, and they can ask Siri to fire up the app or create those Shortcuts, among other things. 

OpenAI has recently started testing a new opt-in feature for ChatGPT Plus subscribers that gives the AI chatbot a continuous memory. With the feature switched on, the chatbot remembers who the user is across conversations, which the company says can streamline queries. The feature was designed to work across the platform, meaning paying Android users who opt in will likely see continuous memory in their app when it comes out. 

You no longer need to try a beta to stream Android apps on your Chromebook. Google has released a Chrome OS M115 update that makes Android app streaming available to many more people. If you have Phone Hub enabled, you can run an Android app directly from your mobile device rather than installing it on the computer. The update allows you to reply to a message or check your lunch delivery without the distraction of reaching for your handset.

The feature is still limited to a handful of Android 13-capable phones from Google and Xiaomi. From Google, you'll need a Pixel 4a or later. Xiaomi fans, meanwhile, need at least a 12T. Both your Chromebook and phone must be on the same WiFi network and physically close by. Some networks might not support the feature, but you can use Chrome OS' Instant Tethering to establish a link if need be.

As during the beta, you won't want to use app streaming for games or other intensive Android apps. This is more for responding to notifications than any serious commitment — you'll still want to install apps for that. It gives Chromebooks some of the phone integration you find in macOS and Windows, though, and may help you stay focused while you work.

The M115 upgrade also lets you sign PDF documents and save signatures to use later. Google has also redesigned the keyboard-oriented Shortcut app with a new interface and easier in-app search.

Some Amazon employees will be forced to relocate to fulfill a company policy requiring three days per week of in-office work, according to sources speaking withBloomberg. Those affected will include workers hired for remote positions and those who moved during peak pandemic days.

Remote Amazon workers will have to report to “main hub” offices, including company headquarters in Seattle, New York and San Francisco (and possibly other locations), as The Wall Street Journalreported. However, decisions on who has to relocate, and where, will be decided on a departmental basis. The company reportedly hasn’t yet established how many employees will have to uproot themselves.

An Amazon representative told Bloomberg today that it observes “more energy, collaboration, and connections happening” since implementing the in-office mandate, which CEO Andy Jassy announced in February. Some of the company’s workforce viewed the policy as adding insult to injury, as it arrived around the same time as widespread layoffs starting in late 2022 that affected around 27,000 employees. Hundreds of workers staged a walkout in May, protesting the return-to-office policy and the company’s climate shortcomings.

“We continue to look at the best ways to bring more teams together in the same locations, and we’ll communicate directly with employees as we make decisions that affect them,” an Amazon spokesperson told Bloomberg.