Oh, and I forgot one thing. Iran is quite proud of the amount of enriched uranium it already has, which has reached the point where it would take less than weeks, perhaps to enrich it to weapons grade. If you were paying attention, you could be confused as to why Iran has any enriched uranium that approaches weapons grade, when it's previously agreed not to do so, that it was sanctioned for doing so, and now it claims it has a right to do so in opposition to widespread agreement that it should not by other nations. By its own words. It's telling you that sanctions weren't effective and that they were ignored or subverted. You wanted evidence, listen to Iran's leadership itself if you would.

Source: Council on Foreign Relations https://share.google/QgdoNXHS0...

Iran Sanctions: Fact or Fiction | UANI https://share.google/aqXycKz6t...

Iran’s Response to Sanctions? Ignore Them | The Washington Institute https://share.google/BnGQ9tcN0...

There is more.

If you were more informed about history you would know that not only did Iran ignore the sanctions and agreements, they expelled inspectors and refused to permit follow up inspections as mandated by the agreements they signed.

And many of the dispute resolution mechanisms were subverted or diverted by the other parties involved, the UN and European nations in particular.

This is so widely known that i challenge you to provide evidence of Iran's compliance. But if you cannot, then consider they did not comply in meaningful ways.

I doubt you will. Try again.

Oh please. The enforcement mechanisms were subverted and ignored by Iran right along. They kept throwing the investigators and monitors out of the country. You could at least be serious and deal with the facts please

Anyone recognize the absurdity of a European OSS project intended to address 'digital sovereignty' relying on a Russian software project, even just as a source for a fork?

Does no one in Europe pay attention to declared enemies?

When you tell me to reduce the 'unnecessary', I tell you to get off my life.

Try the 'irresponsible' argument first. That one lets you pretend you have a higher moral ground.

"WFH was the right thing to do twenty fucking years ago when IT presented the concept of Remote Desktop and VPN."

In the 90s we were using Remote Desktop and VPN to enable a lawyer across the US to edit contracts, print them, solve the dilemma, close the deal, all while everyone at the meeting was on the phone typing to explain to their office staff so they could, maybe, fax something.

Not exactly work from home, but wortk where you are.

BTW, the first incident of this 'magix' lead to our outfit having to fly cross country to train the locals in how to make all this work. Was fun, would do it again. The next one made our client an international reputation.

Point is, these technologies were actually invented to address remote administration, then work in the field. WFH has done what such good technology does, solve problems that did not even exist when it was thought up.

You should follow through and explain that Islam is incompatible with western civilization.

Because that is the root problem.

No, they are not. Some preach, as their scripture, that unbelievers do not deserve to live. Some, remarkably, do NOT.

Not all religions are the same at all. And not the 'same type of cult' either. This is easily assumed by those who reject religion, and where i live that is permitted and even celebrated, but those who reject faith might not be well qualified to judge it.

"The admissions you are referring to occurred some four years after the US bailed."

But, by most accounts, Iran never stopped enriching uranium. For some of us that would seem to indicate the sanctions were not working well.

Iran has not always been honest about its nuclear programs.

As my brother told me once, after about 15 years as a programmer (COBOL, RPG, Java, and the necessary SQL/DB2/C-whatever to glue it all together, he is still working at all that), programming was great, except for the users... But he trained and employed many junior and novice programmers, and his employers benefited in measurable ways.

Forbid you help anyone succeed. Be the leader you should be, not a disappointment.

And my point - Not much of modern Linux is hampered by lack of funding. And the Linux movement has a long history of contributors who were essentially sponsored by their employers. NASA, for instance, had a few key contributors who took time form, full-time duties to make Linux much much better.

Would charging for access have stopped the work on Wayland?

Remember when you could, in System 6.0.7, and still in System 7, copy a file to a floppy (in MultiFinder), then from the floppy, then back to the floppy, and so on for a few minutes, and your Mac would hard crash. Remember?

As a tech I had a few tricks to crash Macs without any software. Just stupid Mac tricks. Not overflowing a disk, either, that was a stupid Windows trick.

Macs were not and are not yet infallible. They enjoy a huge advantage over Windows - control of the hardware. Windows suffers a multitude of hardware drivers, written by who-knows, and every significant attempt by Microsoft to insulate the kernel from bad driver behavior failed up to Windows 8. Mostly.

But it's sport to bash Windows. Has been since about Linux kernel 2.0, which if you were around then, you know was the pot calling the kettle black.

Windows has many flaws to hang your beanie on, but considering the requirements, it's remarkable. Not as remarkable as Linux, which somehow has become so despite (virtually) no paid developers. And I've used Linux since Slackware something like 0.9, which was not 'officially' distributed, and sort of worked. But it hooked me on Linux. Using Windows since the Mach 20 board and Windows 2.0, I've suffered but persisted. Felt bad for WordStar, WordPerfect for Windows, and some other software that never quite made it. Anyone remember Jazz?

Still, bashing Windows is easy. Anyone care to be similarly honest about X11?

Care to share actual metrics with us?