> "Realism" is a much abused word in international relations, but for once I think the "realists" have a point: That Russia is dismissing these distinctions is entirely unsurprising, and other big powers don't have a leg to stand on complaining about it.

I agree that realism is a much abused word, and I think this is an example of it.

The first part of your sentence is realism: it is not surprising that Russia chooses to treat Western help as taking part in the war. That does not make it true. Advising, supplying and sharing intelligence is not the same as fighting.

The second part is not realism. Realism explains what states do. It does not say who is right, or who has the right to complain. "Don't have a leg to stand on" is a moral judgment, with the word realism put on it.

This is exactly how Russia wants the word to be used. Right after the full invasion started, the Russian foreign ministry shared a Mearsheimer article that blamed the West for the war. The goal is to make Russia's actions look like a natural reaction to the West, so that objecting to them looks naive.

Maybe you don't mean it that way, but going from "unsurprising" to "don't have a leg to stand on" does the same thing.

You said 27 days of planned outage is crazy uptime in the world of electricity production. Hydro routinely beats that by an order of magnitude.

This is a fundamental principle of NATO as a defensive alliance, have always been and will continue to be.

Now you have voices, coming mostly from outside, that are trying to make this out to be a bad thing and to show some kind og weakness in the alliance, when it is one of the core tenants of the alliance itself.

And it not dropped to cater to Ukraine, as it specifically has a carve-out for legal defensive war, which the Russian war of aggression towards Ukraine is.

Also, giving up the control of when to declare war or not would be something no country would willingly give up.

Lately there’s been this push with talking points like yourself, and I’m not trying imply something about you specifically, but it is interesting with the timing and the goal of undermining NATO as a defensive military alliance.

I guess we're going to see how the support for DP Alt-Mode will be, as I'm not sure how much bandwidth that can provide, so 120Hz might be out of the question. But for now that has been a simple way to get around the lack of multiple display inputs, you just needed a separate KVM switch for it.

This force-upgraded a lot of Macs at work and we lost days of effective work across many engineers. The machines was practically useless for weeks.

They clearly don't care about power users anymore, and haven't for quite some time. It's so sad.

You should be careful about speaking in absolute terms when talking about copyright.

There is nothing that prevents multiple people from owning copyright to identical works. This is also why copyright infringement is such a mess to litigate.

I'd also be interested in knowing why you think code generated by LLMs can't be copyrighted. That's quite a statement.

There's also the problem with copyright law and different jurisdictions.

The overlap of people that suggest that you either run your own PKI or just distribute a wildcard certificate and have the technical understanding on how to do this in a secure way is minuscule. The rest of those people are probably better off using something like Lets Encrypt.

Funnily enough one of the demonstrated use-cases of Apple Intelligence was looking up information like this.

I've heard similar issues for people using crutches. They get like 3-5x the amount of steps, or not steps at all, and you've guessed it, no way to calibrate it.

(I'm sort of posting this in the hope that someone actually know how to force it to recalibrate)

The whole case strikes me as odd. Not only did the higher ups know about the problem, they also left a paper trail about keeping a lid on it and getting rid of the guy. This opens them up to a lot of scenarios, like:

- As demonstrated by this case, the information came out because of the wrongful termination

- If an accident had happened there's a fairly high chance that the investigators would uncover it, either because the engineer in question came forward or because they think they should have known about this, and cracks appear when they start asking questions.

An unspoken rule in a lot of fields is that you make sure that this kind of information never reaches the people that could be held liable for it. The people that are likely to be held responsible at least have to make it appear that they're not trying to suppress information like this. You quickly lose that ability if you actively try to get rid of people that tries to raise an issue. So they surround themselves with middle management that knows to not bring things up to them, without being explicitly told so.

While instance storage is ephemeral nothing really stop you from using it as a local cache in a clustered filesystem. If you have a somewhat read intensive workload then you might see performance close to matching that of using instance storage directly.

There are some fundamental limits to how fast a clustered filesystem can be, based on things like network latency and block size. Things like locking is an order of magnitude slower on a clustered filesystem compared to locally attached storage.

A classical example of this is in Norway. There's nothing that gives you access to more resources than being pregnant or being in care of a newborn. You can suffer from all kinds of mental health issues for your entire life, struggle to be a productive member of society and be in and out of temporary treatment and be on social benefits. But the moment someone is pregnant they get will be top priority for anything that is even remotely connected with child mortality, almost regardless of how benign something is.

I personally know several people that finally got the help they had been so desperately been begging for, just because they got pregnant. We could have saved them from literal decades of suffering by just providing good treatment early. I'm willing to bet that we'd even be in a position to spend even more money on reducing child mortality, because when you start doing the math of how much they ended up costing society it really adds up.

Some of the early fast chargers (outside of Tesla) were notoriously bad, and a lot of them are still around, for better or worse. Many of the early AC and DC chargers were also without any kind of connectivity, making it hard to properly manage them. In the early days even some of the fast chargers at gas station weren't really network connected, and if they were it was poorly implemented. Not that different from pumps at the forecourt.

For regular AC-charging all the logic is in the car, so the only thing you really need is some safety features on the outside, typically some ground fault protection and so on. But when you use a DC fast charger the charger itself and the cars battery management system has to work together, which I imagine can cause all kinds of edge cases where people have interpreted the standards differently. It didn't help that there were multiple different standards early on.