

Someone with a better memory or search engine capability can weigh in, but I’m pretty sure T-Mobile had a bunch of restrictions lifted for no reason that were imposed on them because they were illegally charging customers who switched plans or something.
Edit: this was bothering me so I did some more digging. Verizon was the company I was thinking of, but I confused it with TMobile because the FCC waived restrictions on their merger with sprint and there were a bunch of antitrust lawsuits about that.
Really confused as to what exactly you want here. You don’t even have to read the article, just the subheading, to see that they are saying the city should build more bike infrastructure.
Ideally, any number of deaths is too many and they are looking to reduce that number by suggesting things to increase safety for people who ride them. That’s a double win. Less biker deaths is good on its own, but also makes bikes safer so more people are inclined to use them. If there’s something the city can do to prevent these deaths, isn’t it appropriate to be upset and demand action? They’re demanding the city build charging stations or battery swaps. That’s basically a subsidy for these bikes.