That's not specific to having a constitution. Judges in the Netherlands for example also cannot do a judicial review to determine the constitutionality of any passed laws. And that's with a written constitution. There's also no supreme court. The closest thing is the Raad van State (the "state council"), which evaluates all laws on proportionality, constitutionality, and executability, and then advises the government what to do with a law. It's convention that that advice is followed, but it's not required.
There's still a judicial challenge happening. And just because the UK doesn't have written constitution doesn't mean there's no constitution at all. Most of it is even written down, just not in one place.
Yeah but why can't a death count have two levels of funniness?
Not sure that matters too much, frogs in the US are boiling fine too. The constitution can be brushed aside just as easily.
The threshold per country is different from the total threshold.
It's at 999k now, good chance the threshold is reached today!
Trump would send fighters to force the plane to return.
Prior is one way, but it also means "in front", e.g. the image in front of you (that you can copy).
Downvoted for telling the truth.
Loads of developed areas quit putting fluoride in the drinking water a long time ago. It's mostly anglo nations that still do it. But overall there's no real difference because in developed nations people have access to fluoridated toothpaste, which is just as effective without the downsides of ingesting it.
And yes, at low dosages there's no real adverse effects, but in many places in the US the fluoride is put in at several times the recommended rate, at which point you could start seeing negative effects. But solving that incompetence is hard for an idiot like RFK.
Most European countries including Italy, France, Finland, Germany, Sweden, Netherlands, Scotland, Austria, Poland, Hungary and Switzerland do not fluoridate water. The UK still does it but may soon stop, because the NHS found there's no real health benefits anymore: https://www.manchester.ac.uk/about/news/future-benefits-of-water-fluoridation-not-guaranteed-study-shows/
That's a pretty fair point, though I assume a spare powerbank would solve the problem nearly as well (albeit slower and with a cable).
Screwdrivers are pretty entry-level tools though.
I've never had one of those actually work...
Why the fuck did he sign it
Clearly the train didn't yield properly, time to ban trains.
Hard to tell without due process.
Yet there were still no findings that Iran indeed was working towards nuclear weapons. Just having the means to do it isn't the same as actually doing it.
Yes, that is the big thing many people are missing. Valve takes a 0% cut from Steam keys sold outside of their platform. The 30% does not apply.
The only rule Valve sets out here is that you don't sell those Steam keys for less on other storefronts. Which imo seems fair enough if Valve is doing the distribution and asking for nothing in return.
The big sticking point is whether the 30% cut isn't too high in the first place.
What? That wording isn't even relevant to the case. That's just Valve saying they will do a review of the price changes on Steam. They set out no specific requirements (other than a minimum price of $0.99, but will try to catch errors based on their pricing recommendations). It's similar to how Valve reviews new store pages and provides recommendations to devs on how to improve them. They do have rules against games set up for card farming scams, but that makes sense.
Wolfire's case is about how Valve as an extremely large player is impossible to go around, so game devs have no choice but to accept their 30% fee if they want to reach most of the market out there. Valve then uses these fees to entrench this supposed monopoly position (Wolfire specifically cites the acquisition of WON back in the day, which Valve eventually shut down and merged with Steam).
Wolfire argues that a fair price is much lower than 30%, and that Valve should lower the fee and therefore have less funds to fight their competitors, creating a more competitive environment.
But that is what the policy is about. Steam doesn't have a price parity policy regarding general game sales.