mytailorisrich

This would only apply to "producers" like, for instance, Netflix, not to everything...

This is not final and may well be struck down later, either in new vote or by the Senate.

This is odd because as supplier if any NDAs were involved surely they should be the ones signing your NDA?

I agree that it raises a red flag when you see something like "For additional legal protection of your intellectual property" for a service which terms should be absolute confidentiality out fo the box.

If you use AI then that is not going to be your bottleneck. So if a project is late one of the options on the table is still to add manpower to "help".

So nothing has changed fundamentally, only perhaps superficially.

Yes. The Allotments Act 1950 covers everything and is designed to override any covenants or tenancy terms preventing you from keeping rabbits and hens (with caveats about welfare, H&S, and nuisance). IANAL, but my understanding is that a byelaw may not overrule or contradict statute law, either.

12 Abolition of contractual restrictions on keeping hens and rabbits.

(1) Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary in any lease or tenancy or in any covenant, contract or undertaking relating to the use to be made of any land, it shall be lawful for the occupier of any land to keep, otherwise than by way of trade or business, hens or rabbits in any place on the land and to erect or place and maintain such buildings or structures on the land as reasonably necessary for that purpose:

Provided that nothing in this subsection shall authorise any hens or rabbits to be kept in such a place or in such a manner as to be prejudicial to health or a nuisance or affect the operation of any enactment.

And now in the UK you are entitled by law to keep rabbits and hens in your garden. A law inherited from post-WWII rationing.

My comment had nothing to do with protectionism or "undermining market economics" but hey, don't let that stop you...

Note that this "Project Bromo" is just a proposed merger of existing companies hence the anti-trust red tape.

It is almost caricatural that the EU's "response to SpaceX" should focus on admin and regulation (and to reduce competition) before actually building anything of value... or that they just even think that this might help.

Superficial democracy does not exclude control on key issues at a deeper level.

I think Musk is helping his interests, which is what people in his position have always done and the US is not directly at war, either. In fact so far the US have benefited from the war in Ukraine, indeed at the expense of Europe... but the US look after their interests nothing new or strange.

The US have been controlling Europe since 1945, and NATO is one tool (when France left the integrated command and kicked out US troops in 1966 it was exactly for that reason).

At the moment the US administration is maybe bluster than usual but I don't think there has been a fundamental change in the balance of power or who's really is in charge.

I don't think Musk's behaviour with respect to Starlink is out of the ordinary, either for someone in hos position. It's just that somehow things tend to get more public, or more leaked, nowadays.

Building hundreds of aircraft carriers a year is an issue of scale, so of money and allocation of resources (assuming we have the manpower). But what I mentioned is more profoundly that we simply don't know how to even build one. It's knowledge and technology which are lacking.

Typical these things fall into one, two, many. Can you build one, two, many? These are very different propositions.

One means you know understand how to do it, mostly.

Two means you can repeat it, so you do understand it, it wasn't a fluke.

Many is scaling the process.

We do lack the technological capacity.

Travelling to another star would require a fully self-contained spaceship with energy, life support, food, medical facilities, even production facilities able to function for centuries or millenia. We simply don't know how to do that.

Not economist but my understanding is that printing money is inflationary as it is ultimately a devaluation. On the other hand, borrowing on the market isn't.

Having 11 equal payments and a 1st or 12th one of a different amount to make the total exact is a fairly common way of dealing with this.

For me the issue isn't so much to execute someone for something they did at 18 (18 is plenty old enough to knowingly do atrocious things), but rather to do it 32 years later with all the time spent in jail.