Hahahahaha.

And the Russian people continue to endure despite their quality of life falling through the floor, runaway inflation, an inability to buy foreign goods and services, an inability to travel freely, and having to deal with an infinite number of flight delays for those who can still afford to travel to other countries.

I'm struggling to understand who still supports any of this. It's not enough to be a vatnik anymore; you have to be a literally insane vatnik.

Perhaps because it's not as bad as some media commentators think? The BBC's Steve Rosenberg has some of the best reports I've seen from Russia. They've had high inflation for all the years I've had teams there (2014). Hardware isn't really a problem to acquire. In fact, I got a decent and current MacBook Pro for one of me team members whose price include Russian VAT was less than the US list price sans sales tax. It didn't come with the standard Apple warranty, but the devices are pretty reliable these days anyway. Russian supply chains have realigned through China. Cars? Maybe a different story. Services also tend to be an issue, for example Visual Studio online activation doesn't work anymore and CLion can only be updated with a private VPN connected. Some websites also actively block Russian connections, on top of filtering by the Russian government.

As for travel, my colleagues have been on holiday in Japan and other countries in SE Asia and non-EU Europe. We sent one team member to Brazil - she got a Visa card from a former Soviet republic so she could use Uber while there. We're bringing some others over for team meetings in EU in a few months. So I'm not sure why you think travel is impossible.

It's a really interesting question why people tolerate the situation. It's bit like boiling a frog I guess. And fighting the system can have major life ending repercussions.

Cynical, but also incorrect. The team members ask to switch to Teams, which they were surprised to discover has better audio quality (but we agree, the rest of the app is shitter). We also don't do much with video, just audio and screen sharing. Slack is better for collaborative screen sharing.

Slack Huddles have also been taken out for most of the past month too. Slack in general still works, but huddles see people unable to join or continuously losing their connection. It also might be ISP specific (some users can use huddles, while the majority cannot). The general consensus amongst my Russian team members is that it's mostly about Telegram and broad blocking or filtering of AWS IP address ranges. Maybe it's something else, it's hard to say.

The UK has reliable rainfall data from the 1860's (165 years), and less reliable records going back further. But compared with 1,200 years, you have the right magnitude.

One of the lessons we've had as the Federal, multi-branch nature of the US governmennt has frustrated Trump is that the government may be fucking us over, but it's not doing it in *unison*. It's doing it piecemiel, on the initiative of many interests working against each other, just as the framers intended. The motto on the Great Seal notwithstanding, there are myriad roadblocks to consolidating power in the hands of a single individual. It takes time and repeated failures. This is why the second Trump Adminsitration is worse than the first; they've figured out ways around things like Congressional power of the purse, put more of their henchmen in the judiciary, and normalized Congress lying down and letting the president walk all over them. It's a serious situation, although fortunately Trump isn't long for this world.

While that's true, a responsible generation aims to boost the next generation to a *higher* level than the education they received. The world has become more complex and faster-paced, and even if that weren't true, the consequenes of aiming high and falling short are better than the consequences of aiming for the status quo and falling short.

So while I'm 100% onboard with skepticism that technology will magically make education better, I think the argument that "the education I got worked for me should be good for them" isn't a strong argument. What we need is a better ecducation that would have been a better education fifty years ago: stronger math, science, and language skills, general knowledge, and, I think critical thinking and media literacy. Possibly emotional intelligence -- it's kind of pointless to teach people critcial thinking skills if they are carried away by emotions.

There are no economic or security reasons to blockade Cuba, so that leaves *political*.

It used to be believed that bullies were low status individuals who are lashing out out of frustration. But research has shown that bullying is an effective strategy for achieving and maintaining social status. In other words it's a political winner. So the focus of research has shifted from the bully to the people around him who enable the bullying. The inner circle are the henchmen -- people without the charisma and daring to initiate the bullying, but join in when the bully gets things started. Around them are the audience, the people who wouldn't risk participating but enjoy the bullying vicariously. And around them are the much larger group of bystanders, who don't approve but are waiting for someone else to stop the bullying. Then off to the side are the defenders, who stand up to the bully.

Perhaps the least appreciated supporting factor in the phenomenon of the high-status bully is the silence of the bystanders, which is dependent upon the perception of widespread approval. Since you can't visibly see the the line between the approving audience and the apalled bystanders, the silence of the bytstanders is absolutely essential in sustaining the bullying.

Lot's of Americans are apalled at the idea of using military force to inflict suffering on the Cuban people. But that's only politically advantageous *because* of *them*. Tney are indistinguishable from the relatively small number of people who are thrilled when Trump announced he can do anything he wants wtih Cuba. The gap between actual approval and *perceived* approval is absolutely critical in establishign and maintaining any kind of authoritarianism. This is why would be authoritarian leaders are so focused on punishing and marginalizing any kind of expression of disapproval.

Right. Ultimately the only way to fix this is strengthen privacy laws and enforcement. The tech bros have a lot of influence; their brown nosing and corruption was really on display when the orange manbaby came back to power.

The enemy are companies making money of your data; business models championed by the likes of Google and Facebook. You could argue that they're just exploiting weak privacy laws and enforcement. The FBI aren't at fault for accessing publicly/commercially available data, unless there's some American law that forbids even this. Stop giving your data to companies. Stop supporting these businesses that don't respect you, your data or your privacy.

The printing on the keyboard is minor. The UK and US English keyboards are physically different:: e.g. just look at the enter key, which are orientated completely differently.

It was already building for Arm platforms. Iâ(TM)m sure they have NEON optimisations somewhere in there.

In 1790, the US population was 94.9% rural. There is no country. in the world today that rural -- Burundi, which looks like blanks spot in the world at night satellite picturs, is 88% rural.

The largest city at the time was New York, with a population of 33,000. Northern Manhattan was near-wilderness, mid-town was farms and country houses.

In 1790 the US was. country you could "police" with sheriffs and volunteer posses, largely to keep the peace. If you got robbed, you hired a private thief catcher. This works in a 95% rural country with just 3.4 million inhabitants. It would be chaos in a country 87x larger.

France also does it because it benefits their military nuclear programme.

Trump doesnâ(TM)t want Europe to lose its dependency on foreign fossil fuels because he wants American companies owned by his buddies to profit from this, not Russian and Middle Eastern ones. Why do you think heâ(TM)s so against renewable power? Itâ(TM)s not just about the view from his Scottish golf course.