Well that's because they are outraged that North America and Europe are not shown as a tiny spec on the map.

I would argue Mercator is just fine and good enough for the intended classroom purpose which is to present the approximate shape of and relative location of different landmasses on planet earth. The fact of the matter IS that EU and North America are more important, so it is perfectly suitable to show them as visible landmasses and not tiny specs.

Your world maps are Not used by grade school students to calculate the actual areas or sizes of different countries. In fact, if thir assignment is doing any technical calculation on the map, then it's most likely to be regarding navigation. I believe Mercator gives a distorted view, but it is absolutely fine for the purpose that world maps generally serve for early students, Especially since they will almost always be shown to actual globes as well in a geography class.

In truth studying Globes and not maps is the only way to get a completely accurate representation for those cases where its needed. A very rough approximation that can be drawn on the back of a napkin is good enough for most purposes in elementary geography. I mean the "Mercator projection" shown in class does not even have to be an accurate Mercator projection to serve the purpose of presenting a world map.

Teachers would hand-draw these things on the board, and OF COURSE the relative areas are not exactly accurate. And OF COURSE the regions or countries they are focusing on are likely to be zoomed in at and drawn bigger. Africa just plain is not very important compared to other continents. I know back when I was in school so long ago; Africa is hardly covered at all, and students mostly learn about North America, South America, and the EU, possibly with some Asian-Pacific geography thrown in.

unless your navigating tools are so bad they can't handle going in a straight line.

Um. NOBODY can go in a straight line. A straight line through the ocean would put your boat underwater.

If an abstract thing like what size any particular area looks like on a projection harms identity and pride, then pray tell what projection should be adopted that will show all areas at their true size, and won't harm children's identity?

Stop showing early students full world maps early on, and show them physical globes instead, until after students are given a proper instruction on geometry, and the geometry of earth.

Also, special local maps that show only individual continents don't have this problem.

But scraping my banking data, storing insecurely, then selling it on to a 'business partner'? No fucken way.

The apps are software that process your data with your permission. For example: Quicken.
Or any of the myriad of budgeting apps. These are programs that you ELECT to process your data in order to perform financial management functions for you.

You have a piece of software to manage your accounts, then what the Fintech software does is let you click a button and Imports all your transactions into the software, so you can analyze them and create reports about your finances. I can't promise that Intuit is not selling a copy of what is downloaded to their business partners at the backend, but that's not the purpose of the software, and it's not what the banks are talking about.

They will want Intuit to pay for the privilege of their software being allowed to request your data for you in order for you to download it to your computer. If Intuit doesn't want to pay them, then it will be back to receiving paper statements and trying to in an error-prone manner enter all your data back into the computer.

Right now if you wish to use the fintech services, you have to give them your banking account username/password and disable MFA
That is not exactly true. The most recent time I used a Fintech app they redirect you to a page at your bank - You log in at your bank. You complete the 2FA during the login process, And your bank displays a message asking for authorization to grant (APP NAME) access, and actually shows a list of permissions you are granting the app.

The app itself never gets the username or password. In fact every few months or so it presents a prompt to go through the process again to re-link the account. The username and password haven't changed, but the bank provides the app with some type of credential that expires and has to be redone.

which implied they had operations in the UK

Presumably Wikimedia still accepts donations from users or organizations in the UK. It is in theory possible they have staff in the UK, etc.

There presumably exist some operations they would have to terminate.

As in I wouldn't make the assumption that they don't touch the UK at all. If they want to be out of reach of the UK courts for actions going forward, then they'd have to end a couple things. No more financial transactions, etc, that cross through their boundaries, such as UK users donating money to the US entity. A court within the UK can order banks or payment processors to levy assets such as credit card receipts inside the UK before they are paid out to them, etc.

including billionaire Peter Thiel's Palantir

There's your answer on why this happened. JD Vance is Peter Thiel's Gay Buttsex Prostitute Boy. Notice the eyeliner he always wear. This is Vance making good for his LITERAL Gay Prostitution Sugar Daddy.

Seems like Trump's Shitfaced Inbred America-Betraying Treason Fuck Corrupt Crap Cronies want to spread government money to their friends. - There, fixed that for you.

We all know what's going on here. Republicans are America-hating Corrupt Sacks of Shit who should be kicked out of the USA or given the firing squad. MAKE AMERICA GREAT by ENDING THE TREASON SHIT REPUBLICANS.

10 seconds channel logo, 20 seconds preamble, 45 seconds on the sponsor, a plea to like and subscribe

Ah! For heaven sakes.. after watching such video please post the one-line answer to a Lemmy instance somewhere Or wherever the heck free information can be put and still be found these days without people having to waste time on excessively slow and long videos.

IANAL, and I'm not even European, but an argument could be made to hold Wikimedia UK responsible.

There is zero argument that Wikimedia UK would be responsible.

It is like suggesting some random Linux UK User Group would be responsible for a violation committed by say Linus torvalds himself, or say the Linux Foundation, because both organizations were found to have Linux in their name. Or a 25-year-old John S. Smith would be punishable by a murder committed by a 30 year-old John S. Smith of the same name. None of that BS would be consistent with the fundamental principal of justice, and the same issue would exist against trying the Wikimedia foundation's crimes against an independent organization called Wikimedia UK.

has a website: https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwikimedia.org.uk%2F [wikimedia.org.uk]

Similarly-named websites are not the same website.

is a Wikimedia Chapter, approved by the Wikimedia Foundation

Chapters are approved based on their activities which are ultimately to promote certain products. Having a contractual agreement between two charities does not make the two organizations into the same charity.

See: What a chapter is not

A chapter is an entity that neither belongs to the Wikimedia Foundation nor represents the Wikimedia Foundation.

A chapter is neither the editor of the projects nor does it have any authority over the contents and the rules in the projects.

A Chapter is the legal representative of neither the projects nor the authors of the projects unless it has been specifically and mutually agreed to represent their author rights.

So the solution..

make_u32_from_two_u16_high_low(a,b)

There, now you know which parameter is the high bits and which parameter is the low bits.

If you were doing rust you could have it as

struct TwoU16s { highpart: u16, lowpart: u16};
fn make_u32_from_two_u16(params: TwoU16s) -> u32 { ... }
make_u32_from_two_u16(TwoU16s { highpart: a, lowpart: b })

False dichotomy. For example, the gov. could fine them daily instead. It's not as simple as, "just let the gov. block them."

The UK effectively cannot enforce a fine against the website, because the website operator is a US-based organization; the Wikimedia Foundation, and they do not have assets within UK jurisdiction. The UK split from the EU, and the Wikipedia's European servers are in Amsterdam, Marseille, and Singapore not UK.

Only if the data centers reduce their storage capacity proportionally by taking drives offline

They won't. Even if everyone deletes email the total usage will still increase.

Even if the storage requirements decrease; They'll just allocate that capacity to more AI training. AI training and CPU is your big energy consumer and heat producer not storage.

.. All of which reduces water consumption.

So what? The water reduction COULD be utterly insignificant. A better proposal might be stop taking showers, and stop taking baths - or only take baths a maximum time of once a week. Drink less water. Turn your pets in to be converted into hotdog meat, or just stop having pets in general, because cats and dogs consume water. Wear your clothes over again for at least 3 times before washing.. etc

Deleting emails impacts your data preservation - the practice of doing so MIGHT create more costly expenditures later - such as having to redo work, losing important photos, Or forgetting decisions you made - who is to say you won't need or have good reason or just want to look back at your old correspondence later?

FYI, there's a "Wikimedia UK". They can't just let the gov block them
They will have to close down the Wikimedia UK probably.

They either "follow the gov's rules" or let the government block them. And it seems letting the government block them is the better option.

Or you can try to fight it or get a workaround in place before it gets to that point

There is no "workaround". And the government's rules are fundamentally against what Wikipedia is about -- an encyclopedia anyone can edit. The rules would require every user identify themselves and possibly have to present a state ID. IF you did that, then not everyone can edit anymore - it is no longer a wiki.

They tried to fight it and lost. After you lose in the courts; the only option to fight it is political, and the politicians have already made it clear that they are not budging. Your only real option at fighting it is public outrage. And finding Wikipedia inaccessible due to government action is probably about as much public outrage as they can possibly create. It is doubtful they have any other significant means of affecting the result politically.