So are you saying the other countries that Iran had a treaty with don't matter? Just takes one? So if any other country backed out instead the treaty is also over? Iran didn't care if they violated a treaty with the others because they couldn't back it up. Either way, it would be crazy to let them have nukes. They just got done slaughtering tens of thousands of protesters. They should have been dealt with decades ago. The comment moderation in this conversation illustrates why Slashdot has died off so bad. Back in the day articles would normally get hundred of comments. Now they're lucky to get three dozen. Plenty of comments that are just outright name calling and mud slinging that get ignored but I get moderated a troll for having a different opinion.

The mullahs thank you for your support.

No (imaginary) kings! Just (real) totalitarian theocrats, please!

Was not disappointed, lol

The deal wasn't just with the US and Iran. Iran only officially killed the deal with the other signatories in 2025. So that would put Iran openly violating the treaty years ahead of rescinding it.

They themselves openly admitted to enriching uranium well beyond the agreed amount. What part of that is a success?

... stopped making sense long before AI ...

"Our science was actually really screwed up, but that doesn't matter, because our conclusions are still right, because we already knew the right answer."

Anyone else tired of that word? "Slop".

"AI slop" has become as meaningless and overused of a term as "toxic".

It seems to mean nothing more than "some use of AI/LLMs that I don't like".

A tool. A very useful tool, if you know what to use it for and how to use it.

... in my $20/mo account.

(Well, except very occasionally for their own services.)

Weird, an LLM has never deleted all my emails ... oh wait, that's because I never gave an LLM the power to delete all my emails.

Do I have to burn their physical snapshots and portrait photos too?

I'm not sure this has been really thought through ...

Came to see folks rooting for the brutal theocracy of Iran. Was not disappointed, lol

So it's an obviously great idea that can't be enforced?

That's not what they are trying to say. They're saying, "Because keeping an armed military around is necessary to keep a free state, the ordinary citizen must also be allowed to have guns to protect themselves from the previously mentioned armed government."