If the number of phones is small maybe. Though I doubt they can just throw lithium batteries in a landfill in the EU.
There are manufacturer’s that produce different phones with the same name and different hardware for different regions but I could not find concrete info if there’s actual hardware differences for iphones.
I doubt even Apple is stupid enough to end up with a significant quantity of un-sellable stock just to ‘make a point’. Or that major vendors wound not have an agreement to rtv merchandise they can’t sell after a certain date. Apple will either use them for parts or reflash them if possible to meet different jurisdictions’ regulations and sell them there.
In regards to existing devices continuing to be used being better for the environment, the law allows that (which), it allows lighting cables (or micro-usb) to be continue to be sold so you can keep charging your working device. You won’t however have to buy new cables and chargers for a new device if you already have a usb-c cable (and compatible charger), nor will it have to be bundled with every new device.
The software code issue is out of scope of this law. There are initiatives that do somewhat help with planned obsolescence such as requiring manufacturers to allow app installation from alternative sources. Of course they could go further, such as allowing to boot an alternative OS, or preventing malicious compliance better. But that cannot be criticism of this directive.
The publication added that CD Projekt cuts jobs at its subsidiary every two to three years, with annual staff turnover reaching around 30%.
As summed up by another former employee, “GOG has been acting well tactically from a financial perspective, but poorly strategically, and the current business model is likely running out of steam.”
So nothing burger? Other than a corpo being anti-worker which is not news…
At least it wasn’t an airliner this time.
No, it was not clarified, they vaguely mentioned they were not based in “free speech” US but it’s pretty clear that it was their own policy since they changed it (they do say they were asking mods to ban all mentions of jury nullification).
If their opinion was actually based on law, they would not change their policy. They would probably also have added it to their TOS before hand.
Your parents made you watch a film because they were concerned you could not distinguish reality from fiction?
It was a combination of some infrastructure being offline (a VOR beacon) thus requiring a different procedure that was not followed correctly.
I don’t believe the pilots ever considered they had crossed into Soviet airspace, they were probably unaware of any deviation from their flight plan.
Nor was there any contact with Soviet forces. Were they ordered to leave the airspace would significantly change the share of blame making the pilots criminal and letting the Soviets off easily.
The intercept claims to have tried to have fired warning shots but admits they were not really visible in the night. I think that if he flown directly in front of them, they would notice if not visually the turbulence. But the decision seems to have been taken that it was not a civilian plane at a higher level and the identification part of the intercept a formality. Apparently they had actually missed intercepting some actual spy planes recently and they had to save face.
What about them? They were there while South Korea was a dictatorship, weren’t they?
Firstly act of wars do not necessarily, in fact usually, do no lead to full blown war. Iran and Israel launched missiles at each other recently and they did not go to full blown war, does that mean that both of those acts were not in-fact act of wars but perfectly normal behavior?
I presume you are referring to KAL-007 (as when MH-17 happened the Russian proxies were already at war with Ukraine). It was the Soviet Union and it didn’t shoot it down for violating an imaginary ADIZ but after twice overflying Soviet territory. It’s disputed whether the plane did manage to exit Soviet airspace after the second overfly but it not relevant, the SU justification was always that it crossed in their territory not that it entered a unilaterally declared ADIZ.
Why? China also has an ADIZ which just like S.Korea’s and every ADIZ is based on bullshit not on international law. China will also “intercept” aka fly planes alongside and whine about Korean “aggression”.
ADIZ violations are not real. Actually trying to enforce one by shooting down planes would be an unprovoked act of war.
There are legitimate uses like health information campaigns (vaccination campaigns, anti smoking campaigns) and other informatio campaigns.
Advertising is probably a misnaming.
Probably. My point is that I was very confused by the original claim (officials deciding whether people are jewish or not) and the following comments drawing comparisons to Nazi Germany.
OP’s claim was that official call anti-zionist Jews ‘allegedly Jewish’ (ostensibly actually, a synonym) and that they decided if they are “bad” or “good” Jews. It seems obvious to me from the choice of words as well as the punctuation he is not referring to official acts but bias of the official. Which may well affect their official decisions.
If it’s not relevant, then why quote it? In any case it tells me something about the quality of the article.
Are the communities not the ones referred to by the commissioner in his defense? That makes them relevant. If the article is wrong that you have to be part of such a community to be “officially” Jewish it’s irrelevant, the issue is that the commissioner tried to defend his position by appealing to them.
You are much quicker to attack the OP, the article, me than the commissioner.
You could perhaps read the first part as that, a matter of % of Jewish people in an organization rather than one of ‘true’ Jewishness of the members identifying as Jews. Your reading is very generous to him.
But from the second commend it’s obvious it’s the latter. He is attacking the Jewishness of Jewish members of that organization. That he does it en mass does not make it better.
I don’t have time to learn German to read your source, in an English based discussion. It is not relevant that it is wrong. The commissioner tried to use it to defend his position that they are ostensibly Jewish. Actually being wrong makes it worse as he should know better or he is lying.
Blume was embroiled in a small scandal after he referred to Jüdische Stimme as “ostensibly Jewish” on Twitter
Blume demurred, claiming that, while he was happy to accept anyone’s self-definition as Jewish as a matter of personal religious freedom, he was not sure whether the group’s members counted as members of the Jewish religious communities that are legal partners of the German state
In Germany, membership in religious communities is regulated by state-designated institutions, meaning that to be officially Jewish, one must join the Jüdische Gemeinde, the state-affiliated Jewish community
A requirement to assume a major office a person has been elected to should be part of the constitution. Otherwise Biden would not have been in power for sure, perhaps not even Obama.
Torrents aren’t a piracy technology. A lot of Linux distros, especially non corp backed, are distributed via torrents since its more efficient.
A Russian defeat would again deprive NATO of purpose.
You can’t read can you?
I did not deny that I question your atheism. I clarified that it is not due to you reading the bible but due to your defence of Christianity.
I am not doubting that you are an atheist because you 've read the bible (after all I wrote in my last post that I 've also read it) but because of your Christianity apologia.
As usual you answering a strawman and not me.
But visudo can use any editor if you set SUDO_EDITOR or EDITOR variables. If you don’t want to use vi(m) you should probably set EDITOR in your .bashrc and visudo and probably other programs will use your editor of choice.