The existing companies have the same challenge as any newcomer:
They have to build a new plant.

Similar to a nuclear power plant: that is a 10 years adventure.

And because they knew the product was going to die anyway. Open source alternatives have caught up and there's nothing to keep customers from switching.

This isn't a justification, but it's an explanation. If they thought VMWare would be a long-term cash cow, they would keep it going. They know that won't happen, so they've opted to squeeze as much cash from it as possible, as quickly as possible. They recognize that will accelerate its demise, but apparently believe it will make them more money, since they won't have to invest anything in maintaining or marketing it.

I'm surprised they aren't more worried about legal action, though. It seems like it would be safer to continue complying with the contracts, perhaps with far inferior (and far cheaper) support quality until those ended. As for the perpetual licenses, it would seem safest to just shrug and say "Yeah, you can keep using it, and we'll keep giving you every update we release", while cutting the engineering team down to nothing. The aggressive approach they're taking seems likely to net them some ugly fines after some uglier legal fees.

The flying system seems to be the same one used in Thunderbirds.

I think at one time they did say they had antigravity of some sort. Apparently all it can do is make the ship weightless, and you need rockets in order to make it move around or change it's velocity.

The moon base set, as well as a lot of the models, were built for continuing the show UFO which was pretty successful at the time. That however got cancelled in the USA, and they had to come up with some new idea that reused the sets. That led to this strange story...

Not remotely. US hospitals are required by federal law to provide emergency care, regardless of ability to pay.

It's absolutely not even the thousandth time a researcher has submitted an invalid report, then whined about not getting paid for it.

This is correct. Mod parent up.

But it's not a vuln. So it would be worth nothing.

For a report that isn't a vulnerability? Well, it would have cost them $50k, and they'd have gotten nothing for that money -- other than to encourage researchers to submit invalid reports.

And they are the only ones that can draft new legislation.
Wrong. The parliament can draft a legislation ... basically everyone can. The parliament has to decide in the end.

A power normally reserved for elected members of the government, members of a legislature.
Wrong. In basically every country the prime ideas "as in drafting a law" come from the leader or the ministers. Which forward it to the parliament to vote about it. Obviously any party big enough, can propose laws to the parliament as well.

In contrast, the secretaries in the executive branch of the US government are implementing the laws defined by the constitution, or created and passed by the legislature, or implemented directives from the executive.
So it is the exact same thing as in any other country, only the "institutions" have a different name.

Wow, that was so easy.

Do you really think a commissioner can instigate a law that is against the constitution and make the parliament vote for it (which would not have a point, as it is against the constitution) and in the end that law would not be challenged?

What exactly is the difference between a Commissioner and a Secretary? Hm ? I think you fail to answer that without a google search.

For all that is relevant: there is none.

Java works on all platforms in general: the same.
So does: Python, C# and what ever.

There is no damn need to upgrade or change anything if for some braindead reason someone decides to change the Linux distro.

That is the farking point of: "Write once, run anywhere",

So we agree, that upgrading to a higher Java version - for no reason - does not make any sense, or not?

By getting suspicious and doing a gene analysis on the food.

I did the same with google Gemini a few days ago: it told me it can not store anything about the session.

But I am in Europe.

Well, I do not get your point.

And it seems you do not get mine.

I guess we both had no point?

My point is: the ingredients label shows what is inside. It is plain obvious if it is vegan or not. An extra label: "Vegan" is not really required.

It is just an eye catcher. And as mentioned before: there are whole shelves that only contain vegan food ... another "eye catcher".