The Budapest Memorandum is not a treaty. In any case, the US has met it's obligations under the agreement.

The only "aid" that the US is obligated to provide Ukraine under the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances is to seek UN Security Council action in the event that Ukraine is attacked (or threatened) with nuclear weapons.

The agreement is a one page document written in plain language. It's hard to imagine anyone who's read it would interpret it as you do.

If you live somewhere with sufficient wind. In my part of .us, there's often not even a breeze unless it's stormy. I checked, and it looks like average wind speeds here are 4.5m/s at 80 meters. 4.5m/sec sounds breezy, and I wouldn't be surprised if that's enough to drive a generator, but 80m is really very, very tall for something in my yard. At a guess, it's about 2x the tallest tree I have.

Seems to me they are providing a very specialized form of computing power - one that Google's current cloud services don't offer. I guess Google could have built this service themselves, but I'm sure it was more cost-effective to simply acquire an existing service and integrate it into their platform. Put another way, Zync just got Borged. (much to the delight of Zync's owners I'm sure)

Red Flag Linux Closure on the exact page you linked

Ambiguity: "Thou shalt not murder"? Well, is that killing I just did *really* murder, or just killing? What if it was an accident? What if he was trying to kill me? What if he just threatened to kill me? What if my property (dog) killed him? What if I told my dog to kill him?

Lawyers: Lawyers are multipliers of ambiguity.

Politicians: Politicians look like they're doing something by passing a law, even if it's a law that doesn't actually do what they hope or claim it will. When you have a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

Really? I've driven in near whiteout conditions, fog so thick I could barely see past the end of my hood, and a freak rainstorm that dumped so much rain I literally couldn't see past the end of my hood. I coped with all in the same way. I slowed down a LOT. The last was especially worrisome as I had to completely stop on a road with a 45 MPH speed limit. Normally, I'd call that insane, but I LITERALLY could not see the road anymore. Forward motion at all was fairly soon going to mean driving into a ditch. I had no choice but assume and hope any other cars on the road also had to stop. I don't see how they could have done anything else.

Personally, I think all such vehicles are going to have to have a very basic failsafe that alerts the occupants LOUDLY that it's about to stop, then does so if driving or equipment conditions become inadequate for navigation. That's all people do anyway, really. Conditions too bad? Pull over. Injured/incapacitated? Pull over if you can.

Lately, I think you're lucky if the cars around you have situation awareness extending as far as the brake lights in front of them. Too often it extends not beyond their smartphone.

Well, technically there was a ton of support from Congress, considering Congress passed the actual law in the first place, and therefore provided funding for the entire thing.

It's more like there was one part of congress very much in favor of Obamacare, and one part very much against, and the in-favor group carried the day.

Ah, the turning point in my life. I remember it clearly. It all started on September 7, 2001.

That may be true generally, but unfortunately they appear to be 100% competent at at least one thing: cashing the blank check Congress has given them.

Yeah - they throttle back the well-behaved in order to "not disadvantage them".

D'uh?

So a service provider gathering data on the way its customers use the service for marketing purposes (which the customer agreed to by contract) is worse than the government secretly surveilling its own citizens?

Nice!