NO that is not a solution. FABS are incredibly expensive investments that require years of planning and billions of investment. The lack of competition comes from the incredibly high costs to establish, not from anti competitive behaviour.

They are already getting Bled dry by their own FABS, at least using someone elses would offload the ongoing upgrade costs.

it is actually one of the most efficient ways to pay your employees, employees get the choice of immediately realizing it as pay by selling and the company gets the benefit of being able to buy the shares throughout the year (usually at a discount to current price). It also encourages workers to push for better performance as they have a vested interest in the success. The money was NEVER going to be invested in extra R&D regardless of buybacks or employee share schemes, the extra would have gone to dividends for shareholders or on corporate buyouts/other company share investments if not used for buyback.

seems he got it spot on and if you were doing that in 79 which is around when the designs were started for these ships you would know that 8 inch floppies were not obsolete at that time at all. or do you think a warship class was conceived designed and built in just a 5 to 10 year period? surely you aren't that naive?

You seem to be confusing process with feature size. They are not the same thing. a 5nm process can product 25nm features. The article and marketing clearly state 5nm process not features. perhaps go and read up on the difference so you don't look like a moron.

Ignorance is bliss I guess, you could have looked up and found multiple foundries use 5nm processes and in fact some are now using 3nm. Note this doesn't mean the product produced is 5nm, but by the sounds of your ignorance I doubt you will care to learn anyway.

The problem is you didn't present a logical argument. You resorted to a childish rant of you can't adequately define intelligence therefore my answer that they are intelligent is correct. You are spouting the same nonsense over and over, it is not a logical argument despite you thinking it is, it is on you to prove that you they are intelligent if you believe they are despite all the evidence to the contrary.

1) It did NOT happen on approach, They were not even over NZ let alone Auckland so what happened 500+ miles away is not related to Auckland windshear.
2) 50' is not a large drop and doesn't require a steep dive when flying at altitude to put people on the Ceiling, Just ask those onboard QF72 back in the mid 2000's, that was only a max of 8.4 degree sudden downward pitch.
3) For passenger no there is NOT a huge difference, a sudden attitude change exactly fits what passengers have described, as in like hitting a speed bump and both would appear similar for a passengers view point.

If your profit is dependent on fucking over your employees then yeah the EU doesn't like profit. Not everywhere is like the USA where it is a race to the bottom and fuck everyone that gets in the road.

many (admittedly morons) that lost their homes, live savings etc will claim it was a very violent crime, it probably was life ending for some. He is unlikely to be able to pay restitution even if he had a 100 life times to earn it (at least not legally). Realistically it has to be at the top end of financial crimes, 20+ years a minimum.

you don't have to trust them, even the government has to provide the evidence in Court.

his point is, if you are NOT a journalist then you are NOT entitled to any Journalist protections and yes many of MSM would fail here too. regardless he isn't being charged for acts that come under freedom of press, he is being charged with crimes for being specifically involved it stealing the information, something that even as a journalist he would not be protected for.

yes I have read it and have even worked on a blockchain project. No blockchain did not bring a revolution or anything that didn't already have other better solutions. blockchain is an incredibly inefficient solution for most systems (including the transactional system I worked on, which thankfully the organisation woke the fuck up after 2 years of development and dumped it).

You mean "quietly" by putting it in the release notes and publishing it on the website like every other bug? why add BS language to make it sound like a conspiracy to hide the bug? most companies don't comment on why or how a bug occurred, especially to randoms on the internet for bugs that are mostly just annoying..

Yes their economy is hurting, not as much as the US economy, but definitely a lot of pain there. Your knowledge of economics is absolutely atrocious, perhaps go back to school, but I doubt they would accept you.