Maybe. However, let's not become a Chinese propaganda rag. Israel used the F-35 it when striking back at Iran just recently. It worked, degrading, then completely bypassing Russian air defenses of the exact types Chinese air defenses are copied from. Currently the F-35 can operate from 10 aircraft carriers whilst the J-35 had to do its first proper launch test on an EMALS launcher because they only have one CATOBAR ship and that's the launcher it has.

America's problem with China is not today, nor with current military technology vs the rest of the world. The problem is that China's volume of production of ships currently is far ahead of what America is producing. In order to keep ahead or even to guarantee a balance in the Pacific, America is going to have to make friends with and maintain friendship with allies both there and in the rest of the world.

That's addressing the wrong problem. Even if the doctor themselves weren't using the products, the security guard or cleaner or even just a lost patient can have to come into the room when they are doing something. That's normally handled by the doctor ordering the person out immediately and the person acting embarrassed and not reporting what they saw. Now Facebook will have the whole recording and anything the camera saw, even for one frame, is recorded and available forever.

These products should be forced to have a privacy setup which guarantees that even if Facebook does accidentally get some private data, it goes no further and gets used for nothing. If they aren't safe for use in medical situations, they aren't safe to be released onto the street.

That's not the problem. Serious Facebook users are likely monitored sufficiently by their phones which get activated whenever they do something interesting. The thing is that now, because these will be always on cameras, these will be able to monitor everyone else as well. There's the real market. Google is evil, for sure, but kind of lawful-evil. Google would recognize that someone else's conversation, recorded with google glass, was really that person's data and couldn't be used for marketing. Facebook will now have a little dialog "share camera output a) never b) when application requests c) all the time". The same people that dump everything on facebook will pick c) every time and facebook will view that as giving them permission to share everything you see with their advertising partners.

This is a really big problem. Facebook is willing to break at least the spirit of the law, even if their lawyers will manage to get the courts to declare what they do legal. That means they can get a whole load of money for products like this that other companies, even Google, can't access. The blind are rightly not going to care. Nobody else is willing to put in the effort to solve their problems and those that understand will simply opt for a) or b). The "always choose accept" Facebook users won't take any notice of privacy issues until they get some serious penalties.

Over the past decade, some of these areas have slowly attracted enough residents to cast doubt on the "ghost city" label. But the scale of the vacancy problem remains staggering: From 65 million to 80 million housing units across China are estimated to be empty.

from https://www.newsweek.com/what-...

So it's still bad and a sort of disaster at unprecedented scale but they have also managed to smooth it out more than has happened in previous such disasters such as when the Asian Tiger economies had their crashes. Not sure there's an actual clear lesson there in either direction.

There's another fix needed.

If the work is distributed with protection such as DRM then that does not count as a public release and does not get copyright. The first person to release it to the public having broken the protection gets the copyright, but for half of the remaining lifetime or five years, which ever is longer. All works that want copyright should be required to be registered in an actual copyright library as was true long ago.

Sure. trn and then nn all had threads. Good times. Still, it feels very newfangled and reddit like (\j).

yes, lower upper weight limit.

(in other words, no more than 25kg or something - some of them are apparently up to 40kg where it really starts to matter)

Think of them as the blades on a chariot wheel.

Road legal e-bikes with a 15mph speed limit are literally too slow. They would be in danger if forced to follow moped rules all the time. If you think about that, you will realize that most of the e-bikes you have seen are illegal.

This is really simple. A normal UK legal e-bike is fine (though maybe there should be a lower weight limit?). I can overtake it 90% of the time with no motor on anything other than a long hill climb. It can go on a bike lane. Anything else must follow motorcycle rules with licensing and everything. Then it goes on the normal road as a normal scooter or motorbike.

Arrest and incarcerate for anything else.

It's not the legal ones that are a problem. 90% of the e-bikes you notice when visiting London (and actually most UK cities) are clearly illegal food delivery bikes. You can see they completely stop pedaling which is a dead giveaway and the speed is normally visibly more than the rest of the traffic, so at least 25MPH. Normally on a narrow pavement, going the wrong way down a one way road and expecting everyone to jump out of the way, 'cos there's no way they can stop.

They seem to now have a new government. I feel I have seen a Nepali at least once on Slashdot, but their internet isn't great (not terrible, not great) so sadly I guess we don't get any comment. Hope this works out for them.

Totally agree that there's a big big problem with confusing "appropriation" or borrowing with misappropriation. When people stop wearing Mexican hats, it's the Mexicans producing hats that lose money and the Mexicans walking down the street that feel more alone. However I looked at the Aunt Jemima story and it seems, following references from the Wikipedia, like other sources disagree with ABC and Nancy Green was an employee hired after the recipe was invented:

https://aaregistry.org/story/n...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

for example.

Last time we had some major thing with social media controlling politics it was Facebook in the middle east, for example Syria, and ended up as a disaster for Facebook users with everybody imprisoned and many being tortured by people like Assad. It's gonna be interesting to see if Discord does a better job. The crackdown happened by peoples phones being forcibly taken from them and then "rubber hose" cryptanaysis applied on borders and so on. What's the advice to protect people?

Remove secrets from your phone when crossing borders and put them back on when you get internet on the other side.
Turn off face unlock and finger unlock and similar when out on the street.
Use a password to protect your discord (it seems you remove the app or use a separate login and use the browser version in incognito mode)

Do we have any Nepalis left? It would be really interesting to here if you guys feel involved / feel it's working / feel you can achieve something? What is being done to ensure the safety and security of the people involved in the chat, if anything?

(I thought of calling this a thread, but we ain't newfangled social media, so I didn't)