That's great, thanks for the pointer.
7,526 karma · joined April 12, 2015
As an EU citizen living in the UK, it boggles my mind that "EU Faster Payments" was not implemented as part of the eurozone, if not the EU as a whole.
As far as I know there's nothing technically preventing this, anyone has an insight into why it isn't a thing?
Would people saying Iraq doesn't have WMDs in 2003 be pushing propaganda?
And yet, even Windows DELL laptops are more likely to run mainline Linux than any average ARM SoC, even including the ones targeted at developers.
I am no fan of x86, but trading what we have now for an M1 is a net loss in terms of our ability to install anything we want as users, no question.
If I buy any x86 PC, chances are I can install mainline Linux on it. Picking up any particular recent ARM SoC and the chance of doing so is much, much less. The M1 included, after all.
> Pinebook and Raspberry Pi both use no bullshit ARM setups.
Both of these took considerably longer to get mainline support that your average x86 hardware needs.
OP is not talking about being able to manufacture x86 CPUs kind of open, that's useless for most folks.
They're talking about being able to install any OS, drivers being fairly universal, no device specific out of tree kernel patches for the vast majority of PCs, no device trees etc.
https://theintercept.com/2019/01/02/five-weeks-after-the-gua...
Because the VC model relies on big returns for early investors and founders, both have no reason to change anything about it.
Only I fear it won't be replaced by anything more open.
That happened in 41, the bombs were dropped in 45.
Hardly any civilians died at Pearl Harbor, it was a military target. Hundreds of thousands civilians died after U.S. launched the bombs.
This was not a proportional response to Pearl Harbor or any other attack by the Japanese. There was no need for nukes to "defend" yourselves. In fact the U.S. was one of the least impacted countries of WWII among the major powers.
Statements at the time by U.S. officials indicate this was deliberate aggression to show the power of the bomb to the world as not to challenge U.S. dominance.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/gdpr-consent/?next_url=https%...
P.S. I wanted a non-paywalled article.
I'd argue Cuba suffered worse sanctions than Iran and yeah, their government is much more humane than Iran's.
The EU was not able to ensure the benefits Iran agreed to the deal under because of secondary U.S. sanctions, so Iran pulled out. They would have no credibility left if they didn't.
Yeah, exactly. This is way past the U.S. pullout from the deal. You're proving my point.
Or, you know, the minister of justice.
There's no evidence Iran has pursued anything since entering the agreement, the Israeli intel is rehashed old news[1].
> They believe that because Iran’s leaders specifically call for the destruction of Israel, just taking Iran at its word.
Israeli leaders call out for the destruction of Palestine and its people, should we take them at their word?[2][3].
1 - https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/netanyahu-s-info-iran-n...
2 - https://www.dailysabah.com/mideast/2014/07/14/mothers-of-all...
3 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proposed_Israeli_annexation_of...
Has it ever occurred to you the Iranians might be interested in such a weapon because Israel already has one?
This is not without precedent. We know for example that Pakistan developed its nukes to deter India when they demonstrated they have nuclear weapons.
On a serious note, I think the many Palestinians imprisoned on questionable grounds would disagree with you.
Apart from that, Israel is known to have tested experimental drugs etc. on Palestinians[1] and aims to cripple[2], so as far as inflicting harm, they're quite credible.
1 - https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20190220-israel-pharmaceut...
2 - https://apnews.com/article/6035b1d3293c4a298145afbff50ab844
The U.S. has claimed that. The UN watchdog says they followed the deal. I trust them over the U.S. for sure.
> American withdrew from the deal in May 2018
And yet, the Iranians STILL followed the deal for quite a bit longer.
> Source?
https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2019-04/news/iaea-says-iran-...
> Is that evidence fabricated, and if so how do we know that?
It is generally up to the party offering evidence to prove its authenticity, not the other way around.
1 - https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/netanyahu-s-info-iran-n...
The UN atomic watchdog certified the Iranians were following the deal until sometime after the U.S. pulled out.
https://www.dailysabah.com/mideast/2014/07/14/mothers-of-all...
Israeli politicians have said enough very questionable statements to fill a book. But everybody sorts of understands them to be targeted at a domestic audience for pandering. Why is Iran supposedly different here?
You can't just say that without tons of credible evidence to back it up.
Especially given Iran has no nuclear weapons while Israel does have them and refuses to sign any regulating treaty.
> In the U.S. our nuclear arsenal is a defensive weapon. So, not morally equivalent.
think you forgot the sarcasm tag. The U.S. is the ONLY country in history to have ever used nuclear weapons offensively.
The Iranians have followed the nuclear deal, the U.S. has pulled out and violated the agreement. If anything, it is the U.S. that has shown itself as the irrational player here.
Technically that's true of the Iranians too. You can't credibly say that Israel or the U.S. hasn't been 'messing with them' for ages, can you?
Having looked quite deeply into this, Iran does not currently have, nor peruses such a program. Meanwhile Israel not only does have a nuclear program, but refuses to sign any treaties regulating it.