Oh, my, indeed! That's gonna traumatize the poor dude for life.

These acts are subterfuge by their nature so you're not going to get Putin coming on TV and saying "lol it was me".

"There is no proof at this stage to link the flying bomb directly to Russia, which denies any role. But as well as the means and the motive, Moscow does have form. The BBC has seen details of the investigation into a plot in 2024 in which Russian-linked proxies in Poland and Lithuania not only handled drones and explosives but also delivered them to Germany."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckgdmrxxkdxo

For retaliating against they president being assassinated and their country attacked. This is strictly against the rules based order.

It's not "their" president, Iranians didn't elect him. Khomeini was a religious extremist who only months ago presided over the murder of ten thousand protesters and we should shed not one tear.

He was elected by a so-called council of experts. Those experts are elected by the people, although screened by the council of constitutional guards. The council consists of six lawyers assigned by the leader and six lawyers elected by the parliament. (There's a parliament and a civil president.)

Iran is a republic. It became a republic in 1979 on a national referendum. Before that it was a monarchy. That monarchy used to be limited since 1941, but in 1953 it was restored as a result of an overthrow backed by US and Britain. The cause of that was that the civil government tried to nationalize oil companies. The last monarch is in exile but, apparently, hopes to return to power if the US wins.

The West is a fantastic liar and a tremendous used car salesman. There's a short story by Mark Twain how he tried to run for a governor. Satirical, but truthful. Yet somehow the West managed to sell the idea that a regular shitshow of this kind is a pinnacle of state development, that states who do not run it are, of course, oppressors and oppressed, and that any means against them are thus justified.

Why didn't they add honey traps to catch cheaters?

But what if a private company does a fourth amendment violation? What if the private company is the governing body seeking control?

I want the dishonest truth.

Username may check out

It's akin to building a moat inside the castle.

That's called a Lazy River.

What if intelligence is a spectrum? What if consciousness is for that matter?

More likely to be a manifold - literally, in the LLM sense.

If a country burns coal. It should burn trash first, before the coal.

Absolutely, but green activists are actively fighting against burning trash. This needs to stop. Even if a country doesn't burn coal it should still burn trash instead of sending it to poor countries. People need to take responsibility for the trash that they generate.

    > Absolutely, but green activists are actively fighting against burning trash.

This is a widly broad statement. Most rich countries excluding the US and Canada make wide use of garbage incineration. It can be done in a very clean manner that disturbs the environment less than a landfill. One simple example: Sweden has almost unlimited amounts of land for landfills, yet chooses garbage incineration where possible. (To be clear: Certain stuff like broken ceramics [mugs, plates, etc.] cannot be burned and must be landfilled.) As I understand, there is not a large, active "green activists" lobby trying to stop this trend. (Any Swedes: Please correct me if wrong.)

Yeah, burning trash isn't a great answer

I'd say it depends. Amager Bakke in Denmark is a combined heat and power plant that burns waste and emits 687 grams of CO2 per kWh vs natural gas at 290 to 930 grams per kwh and coal at 900 to 1,050 grams per kwh. This makes burning trash CO2 competitive with Natural Gas. Using it for district heating probably improves the picture here because resistive electrical heating on a standard grid emits more CO2 than natural gas heat or pumped district heating.

It plausible that in cold climates burning trash has significant advantages.

90% of countries use some kind of fossil fuel to generate electricity or heat, so burning trash instead won't increase the CO2 emissions. The rule is simple: if you already burn fossil fuels, you should burn trash instead.

I disagree. Burning trash creates an implicit stopgap where the trash burning is better than the fossil fuels, so the process is placated until the trash burning isn't good enough, or its downsides rear their ugly heads. Instead of turning to trash burning as a solution if fossil fuels are already being burnt, a more long-term 3rd solution should be explored while still in the 'unsatisfactory' mindset.

This is the way to go.

China cracked the pollution issues of burning trash, and built a lot of high-temperature incinerator to burn trash and generate electricity.

The overcapacity leads to a shortage(!) of new trash to burn, and it has started to dig out landfills accumulated from the past decades.

The video from Asianometry is very interesting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AuIEBSb2xiE

In the end you will be passing messages between entities when your codebase becomes complex anough.

That relates to another misunderstanding. These ideas like "everything is a function" or "everything is a category" are not there to help you understand complex system better.

They are supposed to help you build better foundations; the abstractions to better understand your complexity you need to build (or at least pick) yourself.

Good foundations then help you relate the abstractions. For example, the categoric dual of a product is a sum. We can apply it to relation (relational algebra), and we get that sum is data inheritance.

So that gives you understanding of how functions (foreign keys), product (relation) and sum (inheritance) fit together. This sometimes helps to build abstractions in a consistent way.