When I visited Netherlands it was nice to not have to think about this while going out.

For your question, most people don’t get drunk. An average adult man can process about 1 drink an hour, so 2-3 standard drinks or less spread out over a game should be fine. You also kinda coordinate with your group to make sure someone’s good to drive.

If you’re all planning on getting drunk, you take Ubers. You can also come back in the morning for your car if it was unplanned

Let’s go one step further and make them a gig worker so CVS doesn’t have to pay them for downtime and instead we get to tip

Assuming the company running the service and doing the verification is acting in good faith (big leap here, I get it) couldn’t you verify an identity, store a piece of static information about that person (DL, SSN even tho that sucks) in a hash so that no one else could use that identity to create an account and then issue an account ID with no link to identity marker?

This would allow you to verify users, prevent people from using an ID that was already used, prevent you from being able to link an account to an identity, and prevent you from being able to easily return a list of everyone identified on the service. Best you could do is respond to an individual query on whether that person has verified with your service.

I think it could work technically, but I agree that in practice the US would use its power to make you conduct surveillance without alerting customers, or maybe enact some KYC type requirements for internet usage. This would likely be a first or skipped step on the way to that.

This pic is awesome.

Visited my friend this year who lived in Utrecht and he said this library is his favorite place to go to the bathroom for free

This is about Apple helping build tools for policing. Not about giving over its customers data to police.

Nah that’s what they’re saying. That people used to say that and they were proved wrong.

I know I’m probably doing it wrong but this is how I feel whenever I write unit tests

I’m a developer at the biggest one of these systems in America. It is stupid expensive. But we support full electronic patient communication. And most of our competitors do too. I’m sorry you’re stuck with one of the few who doesn’t have that option or are choosing not to use it.

Hopefully they come around in the next decade!

FHIR baby!

From reading other stuff it seems much more likely that its a nuclear powered satellite jammer, not a nuclear satellite weapon. Nuclear powered would allow it to more effectively jam for longer distances/periods of time. We all have nuclear powered satellites in orbit which breaks no nuclear treaties so it sounds like they’re being intentionally vague for some russia fearmongering.

Not to say it’s not bad tho - it could take out commercial satellites like starlink very effectively and we know how critical that’s been for Ukraine/would be for Taiwan