No, that is your assumption and on you to prove. My argument is in an acquisition many of those will be laid off in short order for "efficiency" reasons and there is precedent for that particularly in filings where consolidation of resources is presented a reason for merger particularly when the other company is struggling. Also part of my proposal is that not allowing mergers will create more competition so those people can get more jobs. If good companies with bad luck deserve to be aquired then how can you argue good employees in bad companies wont get hired again? This is contradictory.

This example contradicts itself.

This also does. Unable to make debt is a prime example of how companies die. You took on debt because you were not making money. Profitable companies can get lifelines because they make profit and can tend to show they can continue growth.

*European* regulators to be clear. Sounds like you agree with me. See my thing is I think your latter example, the Figma example is in the 80/20 rule. The vast majority of MA is for this reason the vast minority is for your former reason, the altruistic "they're really good but just couldn't sell their idea". I am very willing to sacrifice the much smaller and much less consequention minority to stop the far more harmful majority.

Well then as part of my plan I would make it easier for companies to go IPO, bingo. What's next?

The trumpistan chose to let putin win.

Every nation is ruled by some sort of ethical code, the only question is what that consists of, and where it comes from. The US and the rest of the West as well as Russia are ruled by a set of ethics that have grown out of Christianity; why else do we regard human sacrifice and child abandonment as unacceptable? There's a very legitimate argument that our present problems come from the fact that there is no overarching ethical structure that everyone will accept as the basis for decisions.

In that context the commitment of Islamic countries to Islam is as reasonable. Your allergic reaction is more a function of your unfortunate ignorance of history. For a corrective challenge, I suggest you read Tom Holland's 'Dominion'; a book by a non-Christian historian which looks at Christianity's impact over the millennia

The keyboard is attached to the computer that runs the software that manages the rfid tag. Could be a virtual keyboard on a smartphone with an NFC reader, for example.

It protects your rfid tag data from being randomly overwritten by parties that don't know the password.

The Sahel region where they are greening North Africa - as you say - used to be wet. The Iranian highlands were never that productive.

The Iranian government is attempting to cloud seed though.

You got it wrong. What they did is pump the aquifers dry and that caused the land to collapse. As a result, the natural storage of water in the land can no longer happen. They destroyed naturally occurring water infrastructure by pumping out all the water they could. This was an easily avoidable issue and they were warned this was happening and yet they did nothing.

Climate change did zero percent of the damage. Instead, what has occurred is 100% the result of idiocy. So yes, it has something in common with climate change but it's not the same thing at all.

Just because the coroner finds that the victim was days away from having a fatal brain aneurysm doesn't make you less guilty of murdering them.

Wrong. Neither Linux nor UNIX are mentioned in the specification. However, it should be noted that the specification is hosted on Freedesktop.org which clearly states on their site that...

Freedesktop.org is a project to work on interoperability and shared base technology for free-software desktop environments for the X Window System (X11) and Wayland on Linux and other Unix-like operating systems.

They do mention Linux and Unix-like operating systems being target operating system. However, there is no mention of UNIX systems specifically. Additionally, nobody claimed it was exclusively Linux, only that it would impact Linux users.

Honestly, if I were you, I would be dreadfully embarrassed for making such a boisterous pronouncement only to be shown to be a obnoxious fool.

Even if you do keep the key safe, it's impossible to keep YOU safe. A heart attack, a drunk truck driver, a falling meteorite -- are all pretty good at destroying wetware.

Yeah you could for example point at the trans panic as the reason why Trump is President not once but twice because without that moral panic he couldn't have won but you'd also have to ignore all the voter suppression cheating and the sabotage the Republicans have done to the economy and the Republicans packing the courts allowing Trump to commit multiple crimes and get away with it and and and...

The Democrats insisting on running a woman when the country has made it crystal clear that they do not want a woman at top of ticket didn't help either.

Basically every single system had to collapse in order to make a has been game show host with 28 credible rape accusations president. Again..

So yeah you have multiple causes for a disaster a lot of times.

But take any one of those causes out and the disaster goes away. So I don't think it's unfair to say those things caused the disaster.

And in this case Iran is a relatively poor country that was trying to do a theocratic dictatorship by America in order to secure influence in the Middle East so it's not like they have a lot of say in reducing climate change. It's mostly a matter of the United states, the wealthier states of Europe and China. And you can hardly blame them for their corruption if you are an American since, well you caused it.

Of course pointing all this out is not going to endear you to Americans. We don't like to think about the consequences of our actions.

when not only cuckerberg, mustafa and satya, but even the shrub growers in Malaysia have now gone full "AI".

You never go full "AI".

You won't have a 1929-style crash, that one will look like a mild recession compared to the 2029 crash.

If the bubble lasts until 2029, that is.

So, is "cyberwar" a "real war" then, as we were told many times before by the party currently holding power, or is it a bullshit scare term that we can safely ignore?

You're really quite the idiot, repeating exactly what you were told, adding "clue" in front of it :)))

Perhaps you're a chat bot after all.