Fine, but this is on the buyer not on the seller.
I mean, if you buy a subscription to something and then don’t use it (or forgot to cancel while not using it) is not really a seller fail: you would have wasted your money even you’d have bought it without a subscription.
I get subscriptions are (mostly) bad, but it is not always a seller fault and the buyer should be aware of what he is doing or spending money.
and then simulating all the toolpaths to be able to export the G code for a CNC machine. I don’t know how much of what I saw is smoke and mirrors, but even if that is a stretch goal it is quite significant.
<sarcasm> Damn, I ascended to become an AI and I didn’t realise it. </sarcasm>
My point was that this already tested on a smaller scale with ships: the fuel changed and that changed the exhaust fumes ability to reflect sunlight which cause some problems the proponents of the solution have not foresee.
I remember to have read that change caused some other problems, and these collateral problems were unexpected.
But I don’t remember if the problem were about the ocean currents or that the ocean was warmer or a mix of the two plus something else.
There are gasses and particles that can be released into the atmosphere that will reflect sunlight and warmth away from earth. In theory that could be done very quickly.
As far as I remember, that was tried with ships and it has some collateral effects that cause different damages to the oceans.
I don’t trust them considering their enthusiasm over it and the comments about Finnish history.
If, as it seems to emerge, they are “forced” to do it under legal advise, it is completely irrelevant that you (or anybody else for that matter) trust them or not.
About their “enthusiasm”, all I can see is that after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Russia is not sees as that friendly and trustworthy anymore: they had a signed treaty with Ukraine to preserve Ukranian integrity in exchange of the nuclear weapons (from URSS), we see how much Russia valued their own word. I cannot blame someone from a country which share a border with Russia for not having simpaty for Russia.
True, someone innocent will pay, but it is not that different from having Russian scientist turned away from CERN or any other situation where there was a collaboration. It is sad but on the other hand it is a consequence.
Go read “Finnisu Civil War: History, Memory, Legacy” by Tepora and try to laugh at the comments about history. Impossible.
As you cannot laugh to any other memory of any other war.
True, but sometimes you have not any other choice.
It’s literally just speculation.
I agree.
Even if it were true, what the fuck does that have to do with the nationality of a few Linux contributors?
Probably nothing, I agree. But since there are sanctions against Russia I suppose they have not really any other choice.
Is that sad ? Yes, but it is life.
I suppose any law in any jurisdiction you want to use it, don’t you think ?
Guys, are you all really that young to not remember alla the fuss with crypto software ? Same thing here: you want to distrubute something in a country, you need to follow the country’s law, even if they are stupid.
“Compliance requirements”? The kernel’s american now?! WTF?
Nope, but it is not above the law.
Even Wikipedia, which is a shockingly bloodthirsty pro-NATO outlet, admits there is zero proof that a “Russian state actor” did this, there are just “western security experts” claiming it (as usual), and opinion is divided.
Well, I don’t think that a “[insert your preferred state] state actor” would ever coming out saying “yes, we tried to to it”.
Not to say that what Wikipedia say is false but on the other hand I am not sure how to check if it is true, in these cases.
Probably. But this way you have no control on who quit, with a good probability that are the better ones.
Only real option is to crypt them before putting them on the VPS, but at this point a VPS is pretty useless.
Maybe the services that don’t need to sell your data to be in the black.
More than the charging infrastructure it is the city infrastructure: when you have condos built without any planning 50 or more years ago, even if you pass a law that every home need to have a charging station in these condos it is physically impossible to do it. Charging infrastructure comes after you solve the problem where to put 70 or more charging station for every condo in the district.
Hybrids: the worst of both worlds.
If you want to keep relying on gasoline then just buy an ICE car
Maybe I can use a hydrid: short trip (to the train station/mall/small affairs in the vicinity) go in electric, longer trip use gasoline.
Not everyone has a charging station at home and in many places you cannot install it, be because forbidden by some old laws or because there is not the physical option.
Wait, they give Europol access if and only if a swiss judge order it. They protect your privacy but neither you or them are above the law.
Perfect is the enemy of good.
I agree on this.
If it is worth doing, it is worth getting it done, even if we aren’t 100% certain or ready on a lot of things.
From the article it seems we are not even 10% certain. In summary, we don’t understand (yet) the problem, we have no clue on how complex is, we have no hard number to tell us how big it is.
I agree, something need to be done. But for now the “something” is just to try to understand better the problem, or at least how big it is.
Doctors don’t wait for the worst before starting treatment.
True, but they start treatment when they know what they need to cure or at least they have solid evidence that indicate something, not before.
Specially if corrections carry none or way less risks than what is currently being done.
Hard to decide that corrections carry lower risks of something we don’t understand.
Ah yes, the usual method of waiting until the issue becomes confirmed and also way too severe to fix instead of acting on precaution and harming profits of private companies.
No, but as even them don’t understand what the complications are and how much the damages could be, maybe to wait to have at least some hard number looks like a good idea.
What could go wrong?
And what could go wrong if we start to fight a problem that we don’t understand how big it is, maybe using the wrong solution on a wrong scale ?
I don’t disagree on that.
Maybe, but at this point I doubt that a forgetful customer would pay attention to it. What would really make the difference would be to renew the subscription explicitly. This way you could be forced to sign for a false free trial, but you would also need to confirm a subsequent subscription.
Yes, this is another way to see it. But the solution in my opinion is not to eliminate the concept of subscriptions. The solution is to educate the customer.