Has anyone been able to find the list of persons included in the source? Vmfunc’s blog says that a list was published but later taken down.

Swiss pikemen would become the last word in European warfare for some 200 years

Ahem… Marignano, Biccoca, Pavia

#team_landsknecht

Mitchell Hashimoto is trying to build a reputation system to combat this https://github.com/mitchellh/vouch

Yes with one quirk. I don’t use the right shift, just the left. Not sure why I’ve ended up this way, or if it’s a common variation.

EDIT: looked it up. It’s very common

a very small number of its actions have amounted to terrorist action

Really? Most I found on their Wiki was beating up some guards during their break-ins. Assault? Sure. But terrorism?

https://www.cps.gov.uk/types-crime/terrorism

Oh. Disrupting a computer for a political purpose is terrorism in the UK. Hacktivists and bus bombers, basically the same thing.

Revoking drivers licenses would probably be more appropriate than seizing vehicles. The upside to that is revoking licenses, I’d wager, is a whole lot cheaper than installing and monitoring speed trackers.

So long as the person with the speeding problem is paying for that I guess it’s acceptable. But then we have yet another example of people without much money getting a raw deal. Means testing? Everything gets complicated when it gets to the implementation details.

Not much in this article really. Starts out with claiming that progressives didn’t like pollution, and thus became anti science. Doesn’t elaborate. Drops the thread entirely, and continues with a couple different arguments.

First that subsidizing demand with constrained supply just increases prices. Fair enough. Second argument is that there are too many veto points in the building/producing pipeline. Probably also fair.

But that’s really the whole Abundance argument, and the article alludes to that book repeatedly. I can’t tell if this was supposed to be its own original argument, or just a description of the Abundance arguments. I bet there are better synopses of the Abundance arguments than this article though.

Are we talking about the Donut Labs battery, or is someone alse promising to bring solid state batteries to market this year? My gut says Donut Labs is like 1/8 odds of coming through.

Put a # TODO comment on it

Thermaltake Riing fan controller needs special python software. It worked fine from RPM in Fedora 42, but it hasn’t been updated for Fedora 43 yet. Tried installing with pip, and creating a systemd service, but it didn’t work immediately, and haven’t had time to fuss with it again. Probably just going to get new fans I can control through mobo.

Was using default Fedora gnome, but it started getting into hibernation loops. Swapped to KDE, but I’m not sure I cleaned up the gnome install perfectly.

What about coffee?

Qatar has much better relations with Iran than most Arab states. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran–Qatar_relations

Maybe they’re betting that the telcos have more money for their legal departments than the FCC does. I wonder though if it’s true that a jury can award damages in excess of the requested amount in the case of regulatory fines the same way juries can when deciding civil suits for damages. Maybe.

This is what the internet was made for

Thank you for the text format!

The way I’ve heard these minimum tax agreements described usually is where all the signatories agree to collect the same minimum corporate tax rate. The article says 15%. The US already has a 21% corp tax rate, setting aside tax incentives.

So what does it mean in this case to say that US corps are exempt? Does this mean that a US corp homed in the Caymans will pay a different rate than a French company in the Caymans? Or that the US is refusing to collect a minimum 15% after tax incentives?

I’m sure it’s spelled out in the text of the treaty, but maybe someone here has already done the digging.

Doesn’t Bandcamp do that? I’ve been meaning to try them out.

Ukraine has been nuked? Or perhaps that’s read as “used” as a threat. In any case, the point was that the previous agreements did not provide any defense guarantees.

And what is article 4 in relation to the UN security council? There have been several security council meetings on Ukraine.

They promised to not attack them, not to defend them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum

Clearly Russia broke that agreement, but the US, UK, France, and China haven’t.

Revealed preference strikes again.