𝙲𝚑𝚊𝚒𝚛𝚖𝚊𝚗 𝙼𝚎𝚘𝚠

I mean honestly, why would you at this point? Damage’s already been done, drawing attention to her again would only make things worse.

She’s not going to prison, she gets an ankle monitor and house arrest I believe.

Yeah I think it’s a bit of a stretch. Though some people claim that because she’s not explicitly called trans in the game, she isn’t trans. Though that debate is mostly held in the dark depths of the Steam discussions.

"Sir"ona Ryan, is what people speculate.

Yup. When a right-wing government asks, he complies. When a left-wing government does, he sues.

Kaliningrad was German before (Königsberg) but was annexed by the Soviets after WW2 and Russified. At the time there was a land border through the Baltics. When these former Soviet states broke free, Kaliningrad remained Russian.

deleted by creator

QUANTUM AI? IN my blockchain? It’s more likely than you think!

I think it’s sarcasm mate.

Mostly the photography market as far as I know, those raw images take up a lot of space.

That’s merely one interpretation of quantum mechanics. There are others that don’t conclude this (though they come with their own caveats, which haven’t been disproven but they seem unpalatable to most physicists).

Still, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle does claim that even if the universe is predictable, it’s essentially impossible to gather the information to actually predict it.

Yeah Merz seems reasonable geopolitically speaking, and seems willing to make the hard choices. I’m not terribly sad about Scholz losing to him, especially as another GroKo is most likely to happen.

Wdym “soon”. They’ve been visible for a while now.

Tuta would also be required to implement a backdoor in their encryption if this law passes. In this post they’ve stated they will refuse to do so, because it’s not possible.

I think most people’s alternative to a touchsceen is a mouse, not the touchpad.

There is of course wiggle room in the NATO clause, but there’s less of it. Additionally, the fact that the collective decides if military action is needed then individual members don’t get an opt-out of that.

Of course, ultimately nothing is ironclad, but given the established precedent for A5 and the excessive amount of individual wiggle room in A42, as far as I know A5 is considered to be more likely to be successfully invoked than A42 is.

I think it’s generally agreed upon that Art. 42 (7) of the EU-Treaty is stronger than Art. 5.

That’s absolutely not the consensus. This is what the EU themselves say about article 42:

Substantial uncertainty remains over the interpretation of Article 42(7). Following its first and only invocation in 2015, after the November terrorist attacks in Paris, debate intensified on how it works in practice, its scope, the definitions of ‘armed aggression’ and ‘territory’, and which forms of aggression it applies to (e.g. whether those include hybrid threats). Experts note that Article 42(7) ‘leaves more room for interpretation than one might expect from a clause in a legally binding text’. Many experts hoped that the Strategic Compass would deliver clarification, however that did not occur.

The problem is that through precedent we know that A5 invocations can (and almost certainly will) trigger military aid. With A42, you at best get “aid and assistance”, which the EU notes is super vague. The “by all means in their power” is also very vague legally speaking. Suppose Russia invades Estonia, and Latvia says “intervening militarily would invite a Russian invasion of Latvia, so intervening is outside of our power”. This consistent vagueness at every level of A42 makes it so it’s generally assumed that A42 could very well be weaker than A5, even if the wording appears stronger. It’s a political choice how to interpret A42, but with A5 the scopes are defined a bit more clearly, and there’s far less wiggle room due to the collective action, rather than the individual actions EU member states would take.

The EU defense clause gets triggered, which is basically a weak obligation to provide “assistance”. It’s not an automatic call to arms like NATO’s A5.

20% AfD is bad ofc, but also still puts them nowhere near power, even if the media hypes them up for clicks.

Absolutely true, yes.