The definition of quality is quite relative. For a film shot in IMAX format I don't think event the bluray release should be considered "high quality" much less a bootleg, regardless of how good that bootleg may be.

Telesyncs were the polar opposite of the definition of "high quality".

This has nothing to do with the speech clampdown, but the general gist of it is true. Most of the cases "cited" by the Telegraph article are several years older than the recent decline in industrialisation.

I put cited in quotes, but it's the usual misinformation bullshit. Niehoff never had his home raided. Two duty officers went to his house to execute a search warrant but on discussion with Niehoff just aborted the warrant realising it was issued for someone who wasn't a threat. Also the reason for the warrant was that Niehoff used far right hate symbols, it's just the shock media who reported it was due to calling the minister a dummy.

The lying fritz story is true, but it deeply divided the country and quite a significant portion of the political spectrum want the law abolished. The problem is the law was created in response to a politician being assassinated.

Reading anything from tabloid news like the Daily Telegraph is a slippery slope. Spreading bullshit and misinformation is their whole thing.

Now back in reality, there was no "police raid". There were two duty officers executing a warrant at the house of Niehoff, which they promptly decided to *not* actually do after a sensible discussion with the guy. The house was never searched, and the reason behind the granting of the warrant was investigated and determined to be invalid.

But I guess that doesn't sell right wing shock headlines, so be afraid citizen, THEY ARE OUT TO GET YOU.

Obviously cultists like you want to stay in their reality-exclusion bubble. Without the desire for bomb-making, none of that would have ever been done, far too expensive. And it was never a really large operation anyways. Some niche application is not a proof for general viability.

Indeed. It makes absolutely no economic sense. But the nuclear cultists do not even understand basic numbers. In their minds it is all easy and cheap and just perfect and reality does not intrude.

Too many smart-asses here today. I make a point of insulting all of them these days. You may have been caught by accident. Or not.

This is also known as the "panorama exception". AFAIK it exists EU-wide. It requires that the filming is obvious (so smart-glasses do not qualify) and that no person is put in camera focus. This is not a presumption of consent at all. It is a trade-off between two different legal goods and here the legal stance (usually put into local laws) is that under the conditions I just outlined the potential damage to privacy is small enough that the benefits of being able to take a panorama are bigger. Something similar allows, for example, the filming of a reporter in font of a crowd. But as soon as the recording equipment is not obvious or specific people get targeted without consent, this becomes illegal. Note that you have a reasonable amount of time to review the footage and delete parts of it as long as you did not intentionally focus people and as long as you delete all copies of those parts.

Interesting. Good link with actual explanations.

The way it's defined in political textbooks. People like to pretend there's no definition, but I suggest those people should read a book.

So your solution is acid rain, cutting supply, and generally doing everything other than addressing the nations with the largest and most significant per capita emissions like the USA?

Why do you have more of a right to pollute than others? Try and formulate a response without sounding racist or elitist.

The EU can. Using these things without informed consent from everybody present is a crime. In Germany, even owning them, if the camera is not obvious enough, is a crime. See? Simple.

symbolic acts are quite common in human history to this day, i doubt there is a single civilization or even country you couldn't ridicule and mock on that basis. otoh ... there's no confirmation whatsoever of that story except herodotus who had reasons to hate the persians, so his account might be very distorted or even straight out fake "news".

Indeed. That has scaling up and industrializing has failed spectacularly and very expensively a few times now. Those failures are the only reason why direct storage of the waste (which is _very_ expensive) is the cheapest option.

But I guess wait long enough and you can make some money off an idea that has ben proven to not work time and again. Especially the nuclear morons never learn and always try the same old failed ideas again in an utterly cult-like derangement. And, obviously they think this is all "easy".

Works for me.