I'm just saying corporate donations to politicians (the words used by the OP), the legal and regulated form of political funding, wouldn't happen because they are explicitly disallowed. Other legal forms would be allowed, as I suggested, under the form of personal donations (from the CEO of the company, to the party). Illegal methods could also be possible, but I'm not suggesting, God forbid, that Polymarket or Kalshi would engage into illegal practices.

I believe Norwegian (and Icelandic) companies would in any case be allowed to bid; Norway is a member of the European Economical Area (EEA) and therefore of the European Single Market, so their citizens and businesses enjoy rights equal to those of full members of the EU.

Spain (as other EU countries) disallows corporate political donations. Reference: Ley Organica 8/2007, de 4 de julio, Articulo 5. Uno. c) https://boe.es/buscar/pdf/2007...

Spain allows donations by persons, even foreign (vide supra, Articulo 7), so the owners (not the company) can make donations to the parties (and not to the politicians). The limits are: 50,000 EUR per donor per year, but donations above 25,000 EUR must be disclosed to the Audit Office / Accountability Office.

In general possibly but for communications between ground and satellites, it is hard.

The trend for solar/wind (the headline) is indeed unrelated to the war; it could not have been otherwise, as there was not enough time for the war to influence the building of new capacity and effective production in April. However, there is a "people realizing" part, unrelated to the slashdot post, that has to do with Iran. The increase in price of oil due to the war in Iran is being quoted worldwide as a reason to acquire an EV, such news are all over the press https://time.com/article/2026/...

The fine is defined as follows:
* L221-6 Code pénal say involuntary manslaughter is a délit (misdemeanour) punished up to 3 years in jail and 45,000 € of fine. https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr... (link to the version now superseded, but in force in 2009 when the misdemeanour was committed)
* L221-7 (Code pénal) says corporations can be held responsible with penalty defined by L131-38 and L131-39
* L131-38 (Code pénal) says fine for corporation is up to 5x the fine for an individual
* L131-39 (Code pénal) says a corporation can be dissolved, placed under surveillance, partially closed, prohibited from receiving public subsidies, etc. (no jail time mentioned)

There can't be a higher fine, the fine is set by the Code to a maximum of 5x the fine of the value for an individual, and 5x 45,000 = 225,000 €.

In first instance (2023), where Airbus and Air France were ruled non-guilty on penal standpoint, they were still recognised civilly responsible and obliged to pay damages. In the appellate trial (2025), since the defendants were rules guilty, it certainly follows that they were also recognised as civilly responsible.

The amount of damages was set to 126,000 € per passenger for 5 plaintiffs in a provisional civilian trial in July 2011, which is the nominal amount set by the Montréal convention. However the value will be revised in the actual civilian trial when it occurs. In past accidents, damages have been awarded to 30,000 € per death, but assuming the higher value of ~100 k€ for the 216 passengers, it is sums up to 220 M€, making a total cost for Air France of 500 M€ (I guess, this includes the cost of the search for the lost aircraft). All in all there is no need for a large fine, the entire thing already cost them half a billion. For these numbers, source is: https://www.tourmag.com/L-inde...

(Just my opinion, I have not read the judgement) Airbus should have identified the lethal risk of keeping the old Pitot tubes that freeze in ice storms, and REQUIRED their replacement. Instead, as it was only recommended, Air France was only servicing the planes at slow pace.

I understood it differently https://bea.aero/en/investigat...

You say the stall was not identified, but the synthetic voice says "stall", I counted, 75 times between 2:10:10.4 and 2:14:21.5 (then it says "pull up" 4 time in 7 seconds before end of recording). You say the captain entered seconds before the crash, but he actually was back at 2:11:42.5, that's 2 minutes 45 seconds before crash.

According to CVR, FDR, graph of parameters, all documented in the link above:

At 2:10:03, autopilot disengages due to unreliable speed reading. At 2:10:07, one of the co-pilots puts the plane to climb. It was not discussed or voluntary, it could have been a stress reaction. Later as the plane lost altitude, the co-pilot indeed kept the plane to climb (erroneously, thinking it would help). Several "dual input" warning can be heard (six times), as the captain tries to level the plane, or even tries to get it go down (to recover speed and stop being stall), but the co-pilot stubbornly (out of stress) keeps the stick to climb, even when the captain gives clear order don't climb.

Excerpt:
2 h 12 min 59,6 SV : dual input
2 h 13 min 22,9 SV : dual input
2 h 13 min 39,7 Climb climb climb climb
2 h 13 min 40,6 But I’ve been at maxi nose-up for a while SV : dual input
2 h 13 min 42,7 (CAPTAIN) no no no don’t climb
2 h 13 min 43,5 so go down SV : dual input

Their problem isn't the legal cost (peanuts for them) and precedents are not very influential in Roman law systems. Their problem here is their corporate image. They're a reputable company in a highly regulated market and now they're guilty of manslaughter, and that's a *bad* thing. Like someone who wants to run for office and convicted of fraud or embezzlement.

Technically they're not appealing, they're escalating to a supreme level, which will analyse only matters of law (and not facts). The high court might decide the law was not properly applied, or some procedure was not followed, an cass (annul) the sentencing, ordering a new trial.

The purpose of the artificial eggshell is to be used with an artificially created embryo, which didn't come from an ovary and therefore lacks a shell. This would be a step to revive an avian species for which we synthesise the DNA.

Endangered species OTOH need habitat preservation. They have no use for substitute eggshells, indeed, unless they disappear and we have to revive them from the last DNA samples available.

It's not a religion, the actual meaning is more important than the specific words. Reinterpreting some line as "the government cannot collect X by paying its own agents, but it's fine to pay private sector", is corrupting the meaning of your text. If they wrote government cannot collect X, it obviously extends to all means of collecting X, not just the limitative list of what they had in mind at the moment of writing. They would not waste time to write a Constitution that has obvious loopholes. Different to a district regulation that says no wine can be sold at the local bar, and can read it as beer is ok.

The summary says "harder to intercept or jam", and the company seems to be involved in the defence market.

It also says "supporting significantly higher throughput", so maybe the limitation to Gbps is only because it's a first test.

No, but I haven't done that either for the linux kernel and the other FOSS software already on my machine. Right now I have no reason to doubt the app faithfully implements the protocol, and I rely on the "many eyes" to catch errors and sabotage attempts.

They use Apple as well. The account for the EUDI (EU Digital Identity) project includes 81 repositories, of which 11 have "android" in the name, 17 have "iOS", and one is called "cross platform". The latter specifies minimum requirements as Android 10 or iOS 16 and says "you can build it yourself using Xcode for iOS" https://github.com/eu-digital-...

DirtyFrag does not work on Android https://github.com/V4bel/dirty...