Resolutions made by the UN security council (which this would have been) can be enforced through the UN peacekeeping mission (aka the blue helmets) by stationing UN troops along the contact line to prevent hostilities from resuming. This has had mixed success in the past, there is actually a peacekeeping mission stationed right now on the Israel/Lebanon border which hasn't prevented either side from shooting at each other after the October 7 attack.
Muehe
joined 2 years ago
Denn die Vorlage der Ampel-Fraktionen sehe auch "einen rückwirkenden Straferlass" für Cannabis-Vergehen vor.
Huh? Ach was. Also das überrascht mich jetzt ja doch mal positiv. Eine ungewohnte Erfahrung mit der deutschen Legislative... Lasst den Richterbund heulen wenn er will.
Oh I suppose it's still not as bad as other places. It was free and fully financed by taxes because it was seen as a societal investment, now it's ~300€ per semester at my university and still mostly financed through taxes. But the neoliberals sure didn't impose that without a fight! And they would probably have set it higher if they could.
I mean I know I'm complaining from a position of privilege here (sorry US debt slave bros), but still, fuck that shit. Cutting the most financially vulnerable people in society out of an education is what that amounts to. In other words, it's just another front in class warfare.
At this point somebody should really create a /c/Aipocalypse community or something to collect stuff like this.
IIRC there were two variants in the movie and the "green" variant based on humans was added as a new product because the production couldn't keep up with population increase.
And it's made of soy and lentils, hence the name. At least it was in the novel the film was (loosely) based on.
Lanz, den Lauterbach unterbrechend:
Wir hören uns das jetzt zum fünften mal an das Argument.
Ja dann wiederholt halt selber nicht andauernd die gleichen Argumente ihr Heiopeis aus der Cannbisquerfront! Dachtet ihr seine Antwort ändert sich beim fünften mal oder was?
Ist ja nicht zu ertragen das Video. Kann nur dringend davon abraten das zu gucken, halbe Stunde Lebenszeit verschwendet mit FUD. Der einzige Lichtblick war der Radiologe der sinngemäß sagte Suchterkrankungen wären ja nicht sein Fachgebiet, er könne nur beitragen das man in seinem Beruf Alkoholiker und Tabakraucher in 3 Sekunden erkennt.
Geil war aber auch die Frau die da ihre Lanze für den rechtlichen status quo brach nur um dann zu erzählen wie sie hinter der Schule mit den anderen Kindern Cannabis konsumiert hat. Was darf Satire?
pandoc.org is probably what you are looking for, but you might have to create a custom reader/writer or find one on the internet.
Cryptography ⊋ Blockchain
A blockchain is cryptography, but not all cryptography is a blockchain.
Myth #1: Israel is guilty of “genocide” in Gaza.
The term “genocide” has a clear meaning—it’s the destruction or attempted destruction of a whole people.
Yes , 95% of people starving in the world were in Gaza when Israel chose to withhold aid to them. That is the attempted destruction of a whole people
Not sure why you are debating semantics here, as that statement is just straight up wrong, which can be easily confirmed by taking a single look at article 2 of the Genocide Convention (emphasis mine):
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such
I don't have sources at hand so this is off the top of my head, but IIRC stabilising carbon levels in the atmosphere would leave us with as an additional increase of 0.5-1°C over the next hundred years. Current anthropogenic emissions are roughly 10 Gigatons of carbon per year (GtC/a), while natural carbon sinks take up roughly 5 GtC/a. This means we would have to cut emissions in half to reach that point. Even if we were to magically get to a rather unlikely zero emissions, so 0 GtC/a, the carbon that is already in the atmosphere only gets sequestered at a rate of 5 GtC/a still, so it would take some time to return to pre-industrial concentration levels. Further warming would stop relatively fast, but it wouldn't reverse the damage that has already occurred due to the warming so far. Many ecosystems would still fail because their equilibrium has already been irrecoverably disrupted and they are just limping along in a proverbial death spiral. Which is the problem with reducing the question to climate effects. So even if we had this magical carbon switch, which we sadly don't, things are all but guaranteed to get worse for a good while there.
Say what? Did you watch your own video? Because I followed your link, watched it for ~3min, and he is clearly 100% being sarcastic. Not just in tone of voice, it's clear from the content. No doubt about it. When laying out his "plan to destroy democracy" it's a laundry list of points from the stop-the-steal bullshit. Among that:
All things the Republicans accused the Democrats of doing during the 2020 election. Then he ends with saying:
I mean the guy went off the deep end and is obviously insane, but there is simply no doubt that he was being sarcastic here and that the measures he cites are not his actual plan. A Republican letting millions of people into the country voluntarily should have given it away to even the densest of viewers.