But once you worsen a problem enough, you are the primary cause.

Conspiracy nuts are harmless until their opinions become more widespread. The root cause is social media illiteracy but if you have nation states acting as fire accelerants every single sparking wire can result in an inferno.

Oh, and this didn’t even start in the 90s. The Soviets didn’t spread HIV conspiracy theories for fun and games.

Why did Russia bother doing anything if it would’ve happened regardless apparently?

To be fair, school lunches aren’t free in Germany.

Technically they could be considered free if you factor in monthly child benefits (currently at 259€ per child) or parents further qualify for social assistance.

You just do not need to go 100% renewable immediately. As per the pareto principle: 80% of the result can be achieved with 20% of the effort.

Put up enough renewables NOW to achieve 80% green, decentralized energy. But since we are still very far off from that result, there is no need to waste money for nuclear power plants. We don’t even have enough renewables to result in negative energy prices, so there is no need for batteries just yet. Guess what happens the moment energy prices do become negative for large parts of the year:

1. Companies will invest into battery storage to store and later sell this energy.
2. Conventional power plants cannot operate for half the year or longer.
3. Energy consumption by companies and households will start to adher to the energy production with the proliferation of smart energy grids.

Nuclear cannot be adjusted to demand at all by the way. It is extremely inflexible and does not handly varying demand well. Varying demand that will occur in the coming decades due to smart energy grids becoming a thing.

You also haven’t explained why the only countries who build nuclear in significant numbers also possess nuclear weapons. Nobody builds nuclear power plants for the climate.

As long as we aren’t at regular negative energy prices, it is more cost effective and better for the climate to invest into renewables. Once we are there, nuclear power plants are economically unviable due to their aforementioned inflexibility.

The only economical stopgap until we are fully renewable will be flexible emergency gas power plants that run for a couple of days/weeks per year at most. And due to the fact they are an order of magnitude cheaper than nuclear, you have vastly more resources for expanding battery storage and renewables.

Because fossil fuel companies are lobbying for it. Renewables are cheap and quick to set up, every single solar panel immediately lowers the demand for oil/gas/coal a tiny bit.

Nuclear energy on the other hand takes ages to set up and is far more expensive per kWh than renewables. Every single euro spent on nuclear is one euro taken away from renewables.

Oh, and in countries with nuclear weapons programmes, nuclear energy is a way to stealthily increase the military budget.

Audio seems to also be part of TP Vision.

https://www.tpvision.com/about-us

blablabla Philips TV and Audio brands.

Wikipedia isn’t important because of its data. Rather because of the fact it is continuously updated, extended, and fixed at a gigantic scale.

If Wikipedia ever dies, its information will lose relevance by the day. After a decade or two without a similar-scale replacement, will anyone even care?

Try not to derail please.

My comment only clarifies the Xcreet stating a German court has deemed the phrase “From the river to the sea” illegal was false. If you have anything to say about this decision from a legal POV feel free to comment, as I am not a lawyer and cannot properly evaluate this decision.

But whether or not the decision to classify Hamas as a terrorist organization is justified is not something I argued about.

This is false.

The Kammergericht Berlin (uppermost criminal court for Berlin) has ruled the reasoning of the lower instance why this phrase is not an illegal slogan was not sufficient and there were mistakes in the judgement. It has reopened the case and given it back to the same instance to re-evaluate.

There seem to be two main points:

2. The fact that a slogan is older than the terrorist organization does not preclude its classification as a distinguishing mark if the organization has adopted the already common phrase in such a way that it at least also appears as its distinguishing mark.

4. In principle, the grounds for the judgment must indicate the field of expertise of the expert consulted. If the academic training and even the area of activity in which the expert usually works remain unclear, this constitutes a factual and legal error in the judgment.

There are a couple more minor points from the full reasoning. For example, apparently the court argued even if the phrase were illegal, since the defendant claimed to be an opponent of Hamas they used the parole to display this opposition (analogous to reclaiming slurs) - but the court didn’t require the defendant to demonstrate/elaborate on this opposition.

Here’s the full decision, in German

https://gesetze.berlin.de/bsbe/document/NJRE001632041

The court has very much NOT ruled about the (il)legality of the phrase. Only that the lower court’s reasoning was shit.

Besides the fact that nearly very single account on all major social media is already identified, you are also conflating age verification with identification. Age verification can be anonymous but it depends on the implementation.

IP addresses are already linked to your identity. Or does your ISP not know who to bill every month? It’s just they’re not known to the government until a warrant is provided.

Who would you rather trust? Foreign social media companies controlled by hostile governments trying to turn your country fascist or your own government?

Are you even from the EU? Every EU citizen has access to an eID per the eIDAS regulation. No AI needed whatsoever to determine your age privately. No AI or US company involved.

If the companies are required to verify user’s age using this - and only this - way, they cannot further identify their users.

Only the government could in theory know your social media profile as a result. But there is absolutely nothing preventing them from requiring social media companies to disclose the phone numbers (and as such identities) of its users already.

This heavily depends on the implementation.

The EU has had digital IDs for years now and they can be used to anonymously (according to the implementation) verify your age alone. The requesting service only receives a binary yes or no if the user is older than 18 or not.

Besides, social media sites are already aware of the identity of nearly all its users. For instance: They all require phone numbers which in many EU nations are directly linked to your ID. And that’s just a single metric! How much do you think do their apps track? How many people grant full contact visibility to them? Why do you think Facebook owns WhatsApp?

I don’t know enough about Windows app development to answer this. Maybe it replaces the old .exe and the now replaced .exe is just continuing to run from RAM? Maybe there is some restarter.exe program in the same folder that does all the work. In any case, this depends far too much on the Windows update process and how to launch applications.

I just know when I used Windows applications in the past, they were able to restart themselves after updating somehow.

I meant the old .exe would check the signatures before initializing the official Windows way to update. Effectively have this run whenever you start the application:

main() {
    if (update_available()) {
        exe_path = download_update()
        if (signature(exe_path) == SIGNATURE) {
            install_update(exe_path)
            restart()
        } else {
            put_up_a_warning_or_something()
            delete(exe_path)
        }
    }
# Rest of the application
# ...
}

The only thing I have no idea how to implement would be the install_update(path) function. But surely this is one way to install updates without signatures recognized by Microsoft, right?

And if for some reason you aren’t allowed to sign the .exe because this breaks something, then place an unsigned .exe in a signed zip folder.

Yes, but from what I understand this refers to the automatic update functionality and not Microsoft’s own .exe signature verification thing.

Couldn’t you do it like this:

• Put hardcoded key into N++
• If a new release is available: Download, then verify signature
• If the signatures match, do whatever Windows requires to install an update

That should work, shouldn’t it?

It’s astounding this wasn’t done years sooner to be honest. I mean, signing software with keys is not something invented recently. Not doing so is akin to storing passwords in plain text.

By fucking obviousness.

At least that’s what a court would rule, likely with more formal terminology.

Renewables aren’t enough but nuclear is not the solution. Emergency gas powerplants are the only economically sound way due to their flexibility.

The concept of “base load” will likely disappear within the next 20-30 years. And without a base load, nuclear powerplants are possibly even less economical than if you were to burn paper money to generate and sell electricity.

Bing/DDG has also blocked the emulation wiki (https://emulation.gametechwiki.com/) for some reason. I noticed when I forgot the domain and tried looking for the site.

For the record, Google returns it as the top result.

Reason #186729 why it’s insane to have no right to privacy in public.

Fun fact: Recording the public is illegal in Germany. Any private video camera must only be able to record your own property. If you do record (and store - smart doorbells without storage that are only active when they are rung are exempted) material you must have visible warnings (that others can see BEFORE being recorded) or else any evidence you collect is likely to be thrown out in court.