Amazing how past player of the game want to change the rules only when it suits them. I'm all in favour, but FPTP was just as shit when it put Major in Power as it is today.

The spending on space exploration isn't what is stopping us on satisfying the basic needs of everyone. It's political will that stops us there. It's the fact that our governments do not see their populations as their priority. They see their corporations as their priority.

Woohoo. Side-moon!

We, the UK, wouldn't own it. The oil and gas companies would, and they would sell on the open market to get the best price they could. So even if the government gave the license, the British people would only benefit through a small amount of tax collected.

Anybody who's suggesting this either doesn't know any better (public being misled) or they are trying to war profiteer (politicians / industry lobbyists).

This was intended before the mission. After conducting observations they were going to propose naming two craters. One for his wife, and the other for the space craft "Integrity". The final approval is going to have to be from the International Astronomical Union (IAU) as they control the naming of all celestial bodies and geographic features on them.

Ok. I'm confused. So which was the final position? It sounds like they retained

The five largest energy supply companies will be nationalised.

Interested to know if this is affecting certain cultures more than others. Here (UK) we seem to find a lot of Americans "false" in the way they communicate because it's too big, too obvious. "You're trying too hard to be nice". We'll understate both positive and negative comments.

It would suggest Brits wouldn't trust a sycophantic LLM as much, but I wonder if that's true.

He liked Bavarian brass band music and classical orchestral music.

• Buy CPU from AMD
• Buy GPU from Nvidia
• Buy motherboard from MSI
• Buy RAM from Corsair
• plug them together and put it in a case.
• plug HDMI cable between GPU and handy LCD monitor.
• Install Windows

The point I'm making is there's so much technological development in manufacturing that has to take place before you can even start, it probably wouldn't happen any faster. Just the technology that builds the machines that builds the machines that build the chips is beyond the 1920s.

Turing's papers on computing were all pre-WW2 anyway.

Tying everything on the internet to a government ID is the end goal here. That is what all the age verification laws are enabling, intentionally or not.

In a land of ICE forcefully deporting people and people losing their lives in foreign prisons or just for resisting a little, do you not think privacy is more important now than ever?

This man took a step on the road of removing all of our privacy, and the community shouted "WTF DO YOU THINK YOU'RE DOING?!?!".

You're not going to get something complying with Californian law out of Brazil (for example), so you're talking about diverging. California can have it's own version. Sadly that pushes burden onto maintainers that may not be interested in dealing with the pain.

The engineering mindset is to have it support both use models, but that is explicitly what people don't want. Hidden features which enable authorities to enforce toxic concepts.

It's one battlefront of many, and a fairly significant one. As we've become on online society, computer software has come to encode human rights to expression and privacy. Those rights are worth fighting for.

He could have paid you $40B for that advice and still be better off.

That's a very good question. How do you spend $80billion?

Zuckerberg makes Brewster look like an amateur.

A large part of the disagreement was never a tech debate. Systemd on a purely technical level had advantages, but the arguments were always about a concentration of functionality into a single critical program. Great while things are going well. Hell when it falls apart. That fear wasn't totally based in technical reasoning.

Funded apprenticeship you mean?

Increased budget, but not increased as much as everything else.

Still pants, but less pants.

deleted by creator

Lib Dems agree with the Greens then.