Yet Israel and the US both have nukes but it's okay because we would never use them, right? When you see someone as unhinged as Trump running the show, I have more to fear from American nukes than I do from Iranians. If it's really about nuclear weapons then everyone needs to give them up, including and beginning with the USA. If not, why should Iran give them up?

Besides that, we all know that we have to get off of oil, and nuclear energy is the only real solution for baseline power. So at some point we have to grant Iran access to nuclear energy.

Anyway the situation with Iran remind me of a Star Trek episode where a world joining the federation is beset with terrorist attacks. The Enterprise finds out that the terrorists are a direct result of the world's government's own actions. Likewise Iran has been marginalized and isolated by the rest of the world, particularly the US, pushing them to extremes simply to get any respect (or fear) at all. Things started to thaw under Obama, but Trump tore up the agreement and pushed Iran back to the only thing that ever worked for them. If the US and the west had invited Iran into the world community, and worked with them for peace it would have weakened the authoritarian, islamist tendencies of the regime. But Israel strongly benefits from Iran being a boogeyman so they are strongly opposed to peace with Iran. A constant state of ware benefits Netanyahu.

And never mind that the US is entirely responsible for this trajectory after overthrowing the democratically-elected government in Iran in the 1950s. The Shaw that the Americans installed was so brutal that it paved the way for the Islamist uprising.

I rode on the Thalys train in France a few years ago. Looking out the window I could tell we were going pretty fast but it was so smooth I guessed maybe 160 kph. Turned on GPS and discovered how wrong I was. It was actually 300 kph.

In my first computery job, I worked at the company that made the majority of resistance (spot) welding transformers for the 'big three'. Heavy, greasy 80lb blocks of water-cooled copper and aluminum.
Stanley VanAntwerp, their wise and eccentric head of engineering and design told me this:

Ford, GM, and Chrysler don't make cars. They make factories. That's the product.
The line, the dies, the welding fixtures, the service parts, all of that, for the required years in service.
That's the hard part. That's the automotive industry.

Stan also told me "An engineer with a closed mind is useless".

Sadly no they don't. BYD cars are just like Tesla and anything sold on the market today. Big screens, always-on connectivity.

The EV perveyors say the screens and always-on internet connection are important so you can make sure to get maximum efficiency and make sure you can find a charging station. Some EVs even require you to use GPS navigation in order to properly prepare the battery for a fast charge! Apparently tactile controls and small screens just don't work on cars these days.

I love the idea of EVs and want to buy one, but the screens are a huge turn off.

Albums don't really exist on spotify anymore. I mean they do exist theoretically, but most music renters never listen to full albums. Spotify just feeds them individual songs according to their algorithm. I suspect in the near future, if it's not happened already, musicians will just be releasing singles as albums have no real meaning in this streaming world.

You're right of course. But rsilvergun is not wrong too. Slavery is definitely part of the equation.

But at a higher level, China has beaten the rest of the world because they've got a complete, integrated supply chain. Literally every part of a modern EV is made somewhere nearby, by more than one company. Whereas in the US, companies largely abandoned that model in favor of just in time suppliers. In other words, Harvard Business School that placed short-term quarterly gains above everything else. Labor is a liability. having parts on hand is a liability. Making those parts locally is a liability. I'm a little surprised Trump hasn't targetted this aspect of American business ethos and executive ordered the Harvard Business School to disband after the damage they've caused and influenced industry wreckers like Neutron Jack.

I don't think you can run x64 Windows in Parallels on the M series macs. At least you couldn't do that last time I tried it. Windows has its own x86 emulator that works pretty well within Windows for ARM.

Linux is a hot mess on *all* ARM hardware because of proprietary firmware. Device trees, kernel forks, custom distros, extremely proprietary GPUs.

Snapdragon X supports UEFI, so that should make Linux support easier and more standardized and capable of running generic distros. In theory...

Do you use a ton of existing crates? If so how do you determine what is appropriate to use? Do you worry about supply-chain attacks? It seems like every rust app I try to install with cargo pulls in a dozen or more dependencies. I have no idea how to vet them. As a mere user it seems like I'm trading one kind of vulnerability for another. This is not unique to rust of course. All the modern, hip languages do the same thing.

Not quite sure what you mean about ignoring concepts like RAII. Those go back to the beginning of C++.

Rust's reason to exist has not gone away. Rust will continue to slowly replace C and C++ in systems programming where it makes sense.

In other areas where it seems more like people are creating yet another version of a classic utility but in Rust, the answer is, "yes I sure hope so."

The problem with all modern programming languages now comes down to supply chain risk. Even the simplest utilities depend on dozens of crates to be pulled into my computer from who knows where. Go, Dart, Python, Node.js, all have this problem. I just installed a cool utility (written in Rust of course) that pulled in 50 dependencies. I am to trust that they are all good of course. Still it seems a little excessive for a utility that does graphical browsing of disk usage (darya). But hey it's a modern utility.

Maybe it will settle into just being a useful tool, like it was intended.

1st gen Paperwhite is in the list of devices losing support. DeDRM effectively neutered on it, since you will no longer be able to buy/rent books for it after May 20.

DeDRM only works for Kindles 4 and earlier, which is the biggest reason Amazon is discontinuing support for them. So as of May 20, there is no practical way to decrypt Kindle books and back them up any longer.

Obviously there are some other reasons for dropping support including the fact that older Kindles don't support formats like epub with more advanced layout and formatting options. But it still stinks.

Sadly I don't know of any decent alternative to buy ebooks at a reasonable price that I can back up to my local calibre library. I guess one alternative is to keep buying Kindle books, but then download them from the usual grey market online libraries. Anyway I'm going to make a list of books I want to buy and get them bought before the May 20th deadline and then import them into Calibre from my Kindle 3.

Someone gave a nice tip about picking up a Kindle e-ink screen driver so I can at least use the screens for projects.

That's part of the reason they are discontinuing support for these devices. It's nearly impossible on the newer Kindles to backup your purchases. They really are just rentals. Hence I'll be spending no more money on Kindle from here on. It used to be Kindle plus audible was actually pretty fantastic and affordable and both were easy to decrypt and back up.

Web sites are within their rights to deny access without showing advertising, but the browser is running on my computer and I can have it manipulate the data how I want. That's why I no longer use Chrome or any Chromium-based browser since Google deliberately blocked Manifest v2 extensions such as uBlock Origni.

Firefox is the only browser that has uBlock Origin now. And vertical tabs of course. There's so much to dislike about Mozilla and horrible Firefox UI choices, but as far as safety goes, it's the only game in town.

They survived by manually moving the cattle frequently, using fences and gates. This worked pretty well when you've got lots of cheap labor. Heck people used to live amongst the flocks, keeping an eye on them, and driving them to the better pastures.

I'm not sure you've actually ever seen cattle grazing. They will graze the good grass right to the ground, leaving the other grasses they don't like as much, and then they'll follow each other to some other area. It's not random; you can't just expect that over time cattle will graze equally every square foot. It's far better to move them on before the grass gets that short and essentially removed in favor of the poorer grasses. This is part of what these collars do. They really do work. My family's been using collars like these on some cattle for a couple of years now. It's really been a boon. You can graze more cattle on less land with healthier pasture.