What is the french owned bank you're referring to? Your article mentions ČSOB (Belgian ownership)and Česká spořitelna (Austrian ownership). The source [1] also mentions issues with Fio bank, which according to Wikipedia has Czech owners. The source also attributes this to ESG rules, rather than supplying weapons to Ukraine. Last year, the European Commission launched a legislative initiative designed to make it easier for arms manufacturers to secure funding, including by clarifying the rules within the ESG framework regarding prohibited weapons.[2] I therefore find it hard to believe that the EU deliberately brought about the incidents described. Regardless of this, I do not consider it sensible to conflate the issues of ‘private gun ownership’ and ‘the financing of arms companies’.
>Didn't really stop them passing whatever rules they wanted during Covid, did it?
>Or today with Russia and Ukraine situation. Sure is convenient that we keep having more and more crisis and boogiemen that governments can leverage to deflect accountability and bypass the wishes of the population, for our own good of course.
>Why do you think Germans supported to tie themselves to Russia's gas and destroy their nuclear power.
You see you might get called a bot, Russian troll, or MAGA a whole lot less, if you didn't pull out ALL the topics those groups are playing at once. There is plenty to criticize about the EU institutions, but man that is a very odd focus.
In the past, protection of free speech in the EU might have been less absolute, than in the US. Given the actions of the current US administrations and the (in)action of the supreme court, free speech in the US currently doesn't even serve its most essential purpose of being able to criticize the government, without fear of repercussions (e.g. Kimmel, Colbert).
As such moving services to the EU jurisdiction is most likely also better, if you're concerned about free speech, at least for the moment.
If this isn't what OP was referring to, why bring it up? I don't see how this is relevant, to the security of data from European companies, stored in European clouds.
>At the contrary, many are of the opinion that to defend Europe we have to oppose this recent trend of spending billions into the unproductive war machine.
We've tried that after the end of the cold war, now there is an active war in Europe. You can not unilaterally stop military spending if there are other countries ready to take advantage of it.
>When was the last time germans lined up to enlist in the army?
That would have been during the height of the Cold War, the resulting Reunification does have its drawbacks, but certainly beats getting overrun by the Soviet Union.
It very much depends on your personal threat model, if you expect targeted attacks LOS doesn't hold a candle to GOS, but at least for my threat model verified boot and hardware security features outside of my control don't have a substantial security benefit.
Obviously it would be preferable to have up to date security patches, but as long as there are plenty oven even more easily exploitable devices, and there is no WannaCry level attack ongoing it is a risk I'm willing to accept for more user freedom.
I think people generally aren't keen on putting their life on the line for anything. But even if this was a mandatory conscription, there is still the constitutional right of conscientious objection.
>If I do GPL, I have to make sure that I'm following the rules set out in that license
If its all your own stuff you don't really have to care about the license. Otherwise the rules are pretty simple, include a GPL license and if requested by a user supply the source code (which you can even charge some money for).
>and making sure others who have based their code on my project have done the same.
If you don't care what others do with it, you don't have to enforce it.
As the sole copyright holder (A)GPL only gives you more options.
It concerns me insofar as the comment I was responding to, mentioned that participation in /r/conservative got him banned in another subreddit, while failing to mention the nature of /r/conservative as a heavily censored echo chamber.
I did explain my reasoning. You coincidentally not mentioning /r/conservatives censorship practices, simply doesn't appear plausible, given the context of your comment and demonstrated knowledge of reddit moderating practices.
You're listing several examples, including /r/conservative, yet even though this subreddit is widely known (on Reddit) to be a censored echo-chamber, you do not mention this aspect. I find it hard to believe, that this would be a coincidence.
>But a US border guard looking at your passport and rejecting your entry based on that alone feels like overreach.
This is at least such a common practice, that certain countries issue their entry visas in such a way, that they can be removed from the passport. I'd expect issues entering the US, if I had an Iranian stamp in my passport.
/r/conservative doesn't even allow comments of users without a user flair.
They state: "This is designed so that a couple posts per day are almost guaranteed to have conversation which is not hijacked by leftists and other non-conservatives.Who Gets Flair?
Only mods can assign User Flair, and User Flair is only for conservatives. Once you have a solid history of comments in /r/Conservative, and have been commenting in the subreddit for at least two weeks,[..]
Please understand that this is for conservatives. We do our best to vet you based on your post history on reddit. You will need some post history to qualify - ideally within the subreddit itself. If you do not have a conservative leaning post history you will likely be asked to re-apply when you do."
"Strangely" there isn't a single post on their frontpage at the moment, which doesn't require a flair to comment.
/r/conservative is probably the most heavily censored echo chamber on Reddit, yet somehow you only take issue with other subreddits flagging participation.
>France built 40 nuclear reactors in a decade. Here’s how they did it, and how the world can follow their lead today.
Today France takes more than a decade to build a single reactor (Flamanville 3) and the debts incurred nationalizing EDF, are now causing serious concerns about the whole nation defaulting. As clean and safe as nuclear power might be, I think the world will be fine not following that example.