The Danish media reported that it has the explosive potential of a first generation nuke.
If the claim is that someone made this theory in 2011, then yes, that's a perfectly good source. The whole theory is of course bonkers, but nowhere is it claimed that there is a shed of evidence supporting it, just that the theory exists.
The US makes the case that Israel has a functioning judicial system, not the ICC. The ICC and the UN makes the opposite case, and correctly so, I would say.
Indeed. The whole criticism of the ICC comes from the viewpoint that Israel has a functioning, independent judiciary able to sentence Netanyahu for war crimes, and therefore the ICC shouldn't intervene.
I have no idea if that is true, but the fact that it hasn't happened yet makes me feel like it might very well not be.
They don't have an army, true, but the reason they don't need one is that they are a part of NATO, and are exempt from the requirements of contributing to NATOs standing forces in return for providing facilities and land to the alliance.
So Björk is being at bit disingenuous. It's not like the Icelanders are a shining beacon of pacifism and diplomacy, they're just part of a big military alliance.
See https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/declassified_162083.htm
I've bee on the beta for a while now, and I still haven't encountered a game that couldn't be shared like this. I played Cyberpunk 2077 through Steam Family.
I guess it gets somewhat blurred when you don't need to kill stuff to eat, but you do it anyway because you like the taste better. That's arguably some version of killing for fun?
What on earth are you talking about?
There's nothing easier than just explicitly checking in whether you've read the signals correctly or not before making any creepy moves.
Tip #1 for flirting: Make sure that the other person has a very easy way out of anything they might not like. Then you know they're enthusiastically consenting for whatever comes next.
I quite liked the vibe, but got frustrated about the artificial progress blocks. If you're a competent deck builder it's pretty easy to build a deck that beats the game master, but then you get to a point where he just throws infinite enemies at you and you are forced to lose.
I get it, the gameplay requires you to lose a number of times, but it just turned me off from finishing the game.
Replaying Kingdom Come: Deliverance, but this time no save scumming and on the Steam Deck. It's really good, but the slight vibe of sexism bugs me.
Also playing the excellent Tactical Breach Wizards.
It's incredible, feels like such a perfect addition to an already excellent game.
I had a similar experience. I think it was mainly the small combat encounters that dragged out, as well as there being something off about the tone. But it's hard to put my finger on exactly.
Causation can be neither proven nor disproven with so few data points, especially since there's a lot of other correlations going on. For example, the high tuition WTA countries are also mostly former parts of the British Empire, with Britain having a somewhat different history of higher education and democracy than continental Europe, who takes up all of the spots on the Free Tuition side. So the cause might just be inheriting s particular system from Britain.
But PR and free tuition is of course superior.
Playing hardcore literally has me scared like a mouse riding through the woods. Whenever I see something or someone on the road ahead, I immediately turn around and find a different path. Perfect immersion.
Observation does not require a human observer - the extreme complexity of quantum mechanics remain even without any creature involved.
Even accurately modeling basic chemical reactions without any human interaction takes up more computational power than humanity will ever achieve without a quantum computing.
Absolutely, but the morality of said rapist competing at the Olympics a decade later, after having served his sentence and possibly having been rehabilitated is a pretty nuanced subject, wouldn't you say?
Makes sense. But does this community know whether he has done so? My understanding is that the crime was committed a decade ago, and that he admits fault. I assume nobody here followed it at the time.
It seems this community has turned very quickly to an un-nuanced discussion with very little data.
No sympathy for him from here, but this is an interesting conversation about justice.
Is it his responsibility that the justice system gave him the sentence it did?
Who gets to decide what is adequate consequences, how long ago the crime should have been, what is appropriate sentencing and what is appropriate steps of reconciliation?
I agree with the gut feeling that he was sentenced lightly, but as the previous comment said, how do we combine that with a belief in the rehabilitation of criminals?