The strangest one to me is Slovenia.
When looking it up, some funny stuff is going on: in 2024 Slovenia exported $22.46b to Switzerland, $21.76b from that is pharmaceutical products. An almost 50x increase in exports in less than 10 years. https://tradingeconomics.com/slovenia/exports/switzerland
Most of that pharmaceutical trade is from “intercompany trade”. https://cee.swiss/countries-slovenia/?lang=en
Some Swiss fiscal accountants are having a laugh.
Trump’s funniest year as president was his first imo. Sean Spicer hiding in the bushes, Trump’s nonsensical lies about the size of his inauguration crowd, the EU president using simplified colored cards to explain trade to Trump, Scaramucci’s 1 week as spokes person, the still liberal Washington post counting all Trump’s lies, … Trump’s first year was farcical comedy, but nowadays it’s a lot more horror than comedy imo.
“intentionally using low-quality AI output in their work without fixing it”
This reads like victim blaming or scapegoating. That ai company makes shoddy software that outputs faulty results, users output faulty results when using that software, and now the ai company blames the users for outputting faulty results. That some (but likely not all) users know that the results are faulty, doesn’t change that the software itself is faulty.
I only know jitter from electronics as well, but it could be applied in mechanics as well. Iirc, jitter is the irregularities in the intervals in a periodic signal, like data transfer. But jitter will be present in anything with a period, it doesn’t have to be digital signal. A jerk is a single action, so there is no period and there can be no jitter. A series of jerks could have a seemingly regular period, but when measured more accurately, the intervals between jerks will have small variances: jitter. Hence why imo a series of irregular jerks could be considered jittery.
Noone ever uses it that way though and I’m not even sure that I phrased it correctly, but because of the word “jerk” I find it a mildly fun play on words.
None of those, but I think a series of irregular jerks could be considered jitter.
If it’s default behaviour for static pages, but not for dynamic pages, then it’s not much of a default. As a user I want ui actions to be consistent, the unknown stuff that happens in the background shouldn’t change the behaviour of the ui. Firefox now mostly gets around this issue by opening search engine links in new tabs (I can’t recall if that’s standard for Firefox or if I had to change settings, but I’ve been using it for years like that), but this wouldn’t have been needed if using the back button was reliable.
I found this 2022-2024 discussion with a few examples of the back button not working as expected: https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/discussions/firefox-needs-to-do-something-about-back-button-history-loading/td-p/4678
I found no announcements of a fix. I also haven’t had much occasion of noticing a fix, since new pages open in a separate tab for me.
I wish that the back button would send me back to the page + page position that I was on when I (the user) clicked a link or entered a form. I’ve never had a desire to revisit automatic redirect pages, so imo default behaviour should be to send the user back to the point of the previous user action. To me this seems easy and logical to implement, but I’ve never seen it, so maybe I’m missing something and it’s not that easy.
Illegal deportations are still deportations. The composite parts of the word just mean “to carry away”, there’s no requirement for the act to be legal. A pretty famous example of illegal deportations is nazi Germany deporting Jewish citizens.
*deport(v.2)
“banish, transport or carry off from one country to another, especially forcibly,” 1640s, from French déporter, from Latin deportare “carry off, transport, banish, exile,” from de “off, away” (see de-) + portare “to carry,” from PIE *prto-, suffixed form of root per- (2) “to lead, pass over.” Associated by folk etymology with portus “harbor.” Related: Deported; deporting. https://www.etymonline.com/word/deport
My suspicion is that it’s because the playstore has become so awful that google is seeing the effect in their earnings. If customers get burned one too many times on a crappy app with fake reviews, then they’re not going to spend any money on anything else in the store anymore. So now Google tries to sabotage the possible alternatives, rather than try to fix their product.
I usually download apk directly to my android devices and install from there, no pc or other device is needed. So your whenever is for me almost never.
Initially yes, a tiny bit, but long term no: it will go to a new equilibrium, where over time just as much leaves as enters. Except thanks to the extra water that is being retained locally, the local environment will be greener + more temperate than without the panels. And that new green lung is likely to have beneficial effects further away as well, similar to forests.
It’s what Amazon, Walmart, etc want it to mean. They want the profits, but none of the responsibility that comes with selling goods. So they did some legal linguistic gymnastics and thus according to them, stuff that is bought in the Amazon store, with a % markup by Amazon, with payment to Amazon, and with shipping by Amazon, is somehow not Amazon’s responsibility.
The USA government had gone after the large platforms for selling defective/dangerous goods, but that was in 2024 under Biden, so I expect that investigation to be dead by now. The EU is still going ahead though: https://www.reuters.com/business/retail-consumer/eu-make-temu-shein-amazon-liable-unsafe-goods-ft-reports-2025-02-01/
Normally running a large deficit acts as a stimulus for the economy, but Trump’s reverse Midas touch is just too strong.
I’d say stupid. I live in a country where most houses are brick walls + concrete floors, and smoke detectors are still common + since a few years also mandated by the government.
The government mandate came after it was found that of the dozens of people that died every year from house fires, 95% suffocated in their sleep.
Some numbers for my region: ~7m population, 70% of houses had smoke detection before the mandate, on average 63 died per year from house fires.
Some incorrect approximative math: Lets assume that the amount of dead could have been halved if those 30% houses had 2 smoke detectors per person (lets say 2 cheap ones for 2x20 euros per 10 years): 7m x 0.3 x 2 x 20€ /10 /63 x2 = a cost of 267€ per year per life saved. Imo that’s a no brainer, it’d be stupid to not invest in smoke detection.
Not the same in all western countries. Afaik it was tradition in most countries for the wife to take the husband’s surname, except in Italy and Spain. Regular people also often didn’t have surnames, instead they were “son of …” or named after their or their parents’ occupation. Edit with more musings: surnames could also be their place of birth, their farm, … Names which would then get made hereditary in the early 19th century, but many people still kept using the old changing forms for generations longer. During his life, my great grandfather wasn’t known by his official surname in his village, only the state called him that.
In the last few decades, most western countries (afaik again) are allowing the woman to chose if see wants to change her surname or not. Or to use both surnames. They also allow the man to change his name to that of his wife. Equality.
And that recent development is also why it’s not a problem for same sex marriage. Back when the wife had to take the husband’s name, same sex marriage wasn’t allowed so there was no naming problem. Countries that allow official same sex marriages are typically also countries that will already have equality for surnames.
So your idea of justice is to heavily sentence people for actions that are not related to the crime that they are being sentenced for. That’s not justice, that’s called vengeance.
And yes, someone defrauding the government should be sentenced less severely than someone who does a violent robbery. Violent robberies can get people killed and even if noone dies or gets wounded, the victims will still be traumatized. None of that can happen with white collar crime against a big organisation. That this difference isn’t obvious to you, should imo be a wake up call for yourself that you need to calm down and take some time to rethink some of the things that you belief.
And Trump does the following: “President Donald Trump signed off on several eyebrow-raising pardons this week, including a man whose daughter donated millions to his PAC and a convicted fraudster he had already freed from prison for a different fraud scheme during his first term”
Trump hands out pardons after blatant corruption & at the start of people’s sentences. Biden did not do that. That you want to portray Biden to be as bad as Trump, shows that apparently your fairness compass is very broken.
And that person who got pardoned after already serving 10 years of his prison sentence … 10 years is already a freaking long time for non violent crime, which also didn’t ruin anyone else’s lives. Sentences have to follow a gradiant along the severity of the crime, if not you end up with a broken system (like the USA one). Prison should be temporary, a chance for correction and rehabilitation, where the person one day gets released with another chance at living a quiet honest life. That you want that man to die in prison … Says a lot about you again.
I looked it up and there was a good rationale based on fairness behind Biden’s pardons. Most of Biden’s pardons also weren’t really pardons, but commutations of sentences: “Context: The thousands pardoned on Friday were “serving disproportionately long sentences compared to the sentences they would receive today,” Biden’s statement said.” https://www.axios.com/2025/01/17/biden-presidential-pardons-clemency-record Which seems fair and also needed to me. Imagine having 10 years left to serve of your 20 years sentence, while new convicts only receive max 5 years for the same crime.
What Biden did with pardons was completely different from what Trump is doing with them.
It’s a vague recollection of something that happened almost 10 years ago. These are passing comments, not facts in a scientific article. If the comment is sufficiently accurate that it can be used to find back the event that I’m referring to, then it’s good enough imo. I believe in cutting people some slack, myself included.