misspelledusernme @ misspelledusernme @piefed.social

Posts

0

Comments

17

Joined

9 mo. ago

Thank you for that long write-up! I'm glad to see more progress. I'll keep an eye on defense news

"The Commission has identified solutions for a simple and predictable implementation," the Commission document said.

One option would let companies comply using certificates bought from a third-party verifier, which would assign the imported gas an emissions value at its production location.

The second option is a "trace and claim" method, in which volumes of fuel are assigned a digital ID, which is attached to all sale and purchase agreements as the oil or gas moves through the value chain from producer to, eventually, the final buyer.

The changes do not amend the main requirements of the methane law - which will become increasingly strict over time. From 2027, it will make compliance with methane rules equivalent to those of the EU a requirement for new gas supply contracts.

I don't really read this as "offering simpler rules". It looks like they're explaining how to verify the origin of methane after the US falsely claims it would be impossible.

I'd like to learn more about the progress on the rearmament of Europe. Do you have any long form resources I could read?

I only hear bits and pieces about the slow progress. I remember hearing the goal that the EU would produce X amounts of ammunition per year. Did that happen? I also recently heard about Ukraine opening a factory in Denmark. That seems good, but still not the broad rearmament I've been wanting to see.

Are there good overviews, with some stats and maybe some nice looking graphics? I realize a lot is secret, but still.

Edit: I decided not to be a lazy bum and did my own googling. I found this testimony about the "Danish Model" by a member of CSIS. I learnt that Ukraine has capacity to produce $35B of military equipment per year, but only $6B to spend. Other countries are purchasing another $10B worth of military equipment per year from Ukrainian producers. This is the Danish model.

Fun fact. The jack of all trades idiom has evolved and been added to over the centuries. Here the conclusion of an analysis from stack exchange

Conclusions

To sum up, I offer this timeline of the earliest occurrences I could find for the various forms of jack of all trades and the proverbial phrases built up around it:

        1618 Jack-of-all-trades

    1631 Tom of all Trades

    1639 John-of-all-trades

    1721 Jack of all trades, and it would seem, Good at none

    1732 Jack of all Trades is of no Trade

    1741 Jack of all trades, and in truth, master of none

    1785 a Jack of all trades, but master of none

    1930 a Jack of all trades and a master of one

    2007 Jack of all trades, master of none, though ofttimes better than master of one


  

The extra-long version of the expression may be considerably older than the 2007 earliest established occurrence might suggest—perhaps even a decade or two older. But it isn't the original form of the expression; and in comparison with the forms that arose during the 1700s, it is quite young.

When I followed the development and passing of the DSA/DMA I always envisioned that it would cause American big tech to leave the EU and a new stack would emerge from the European open source ecosystem. The EU, member states, and local governments have also been funding open source projects to this end (Next Generation internet, NGI).

I was a bit optimistic about the speed. I remember telling my family that the interoperability requirement of chat services would demolish the big tech hemegony by the end of the decade.

I don't think this will happen that quickly anymore. But what the author describes as a shifting of the focus towards the creation of a "eurostack", I would describe as the natural and intentional consequence of regulating big tech into respecting European civil rights.

Overall I'm still pretty optimistic of the growth of european open source projects replacing US big tech.

You can edit PDFs on libre?

I'm a bit confused. The case seems to be about sexual harassment and unpaid wages. The part about selling pardons doesn't seem relevant to that. To my understanding it's not illegal to sell pardons, it's just highly unethical and corrupt.

Wordle 1,605 6/6

⬛⬛🟨⬛⬛ ⬛🟩⬛⬛⬛ ⬛🟩⬛🟨🟩 ⬛🟩⬛⬛🟩 🟩🟩⬛⬛🟩 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩

#ows623 🔎 2/5 (03:33) ⭐⭐ 🔥 streak: 2 onewordsearch.com

Awesome work!