War crimes are mutually agreed by close to parity powers. Crowd control isn’t. One group decides what is acceptable and what isn’t. I would be surprised if any government allow citizens the right to use CS gas on their police force.

They aren’t going to reevaluate crowd control tactics because the crowd don’t have the power to force a change.

Too long in the dryer and they cook. Think of dryered flowers, they go brittle and scratchy when they’ve been dried. When those same flowers are fresh their petals are soft.

Fabric softener is a scam. It just coats your clothes in plastic. It will lead to rougher clothes over time.

Your likely over drying your clothes and causing them to be harder and coarser than they need to. Your then compensating with fabric softener.

Pop OS is the same machine as the Ubuntu but with RGB.

Not all patents are good. But a patent system is good. It could be better but the general concept is not flawed like the person I was responding to suggests.

The physical object isn’t what is patented in this case. It is the method to create the object that has a patent. One that can’t be reversed engineered as it isn’t part of the final product. You could only reverse engineer it if the process was not novel or not obvious to anyone knowledgeable in the field. If both of these conditions are true then the patent should not have been granted.

Patents are not inherently bad. This is a bad patent. Patent laws don’t have to be changed, because this patent shouldn’t have been granted. The issue is ineffective patent reviews, not patents. Getting rid of patents is not a good idea. If you think it is you probably don’t have a good enough grasp on what a patent is.

You can make something if you figure out how they did it because it was obvious. In this case the patent isn’t valid. If you have to develop a solution then the patent is probably valid. The patent is a reward for developing and sharing the solution publically.

If you still don’t grasp why patents are useful. It may be helpful to think of it like open source software. The patent is the code base that is freely accessible to everyone. This preserves the knowledge and lets others build on it. However, to incentivise people to make their code open source you provide protections that stop others from selling the same code you developed.

The incentive mechanism is why far more businesses produce patents than produce open source code.

If you remove patents businesses stop funding internal r and d overnight. It increase the risk and reduces the reward.

The patent system explicitly provides free access to knowledge. The patent is the knowledge that would be kept secret otherwise.

You would still have monopolies, except things like the ingredients to medicines would be unknown.

Patents do provide some value. If there were no patents than companies would make their technological development a a secret and not share the work with the world.

The patent systems exchanges knowledge and technology development for a temporary monopoly on the technology. It means a company can publish the ingredients to medicines, methods of manufacturing etc. if they didn’t have the patent system they would keep these secret and if a business folded this knowledge would be lost.

Probably better to make those submitting false patents pay a large fine.

They are at fault. If everyone that didn’t refuse join because of such reasons didn’t join there would be no one to do the shotting and the dragging.

RS, not the same breath but the pricing is usually good.

The Wii u was better (when the game developer used it correctly), it was a separate screen that showed different content. It was more like a DS.

Some of the games in Nintendo land were excellent local multiplayer games that will never get replicated again. They made great use of the second screen concepts.

Whenever you get a new router or move somewhere, change the WiFi access point name and password. Set it to the same line you used previously. That way all your devices will connect to it without changing anything.

Use a new unique name and password. Never keep the one that is printed on the back of the router. You can make the password easier to share by making it a few words and numbers. Still very strong, but much easier to say aloud to someone.

They also produce much more meat. They also eat indigestible (to humans) food. Cows stomachs can eat and gain calories from grass in a way humans or dogs can’t, for dogs and humans grass is fibre and doesn’t provide many calories.

Cows are great in this case for food security, ground that would struggle to produce much grains or vegetables can still produce grass. If you feed your cows a lot of grains the food security aspect is nullified. Even feeding dogs grains for a country like North Korea that struggles with food security is not a rational unless the dogs provide a benefit like guard dogs etc. During World War Two many people in UK cities killed their dogs when rationing was put in place (not to eat) purely because it was suggested the pets would consume food that could have been human food.

People have attached pens to 3d printers and used them to write letters, effectively print. Most consumer 3D printers are useing or based on open source software.

I think the issue is, printers are relatively cheap to buy and replace. So building your own and programming it hasn’t been necessary. Where as 3d printing was completely in accessible before the reprap movement. 3D printing software is open source as it is motivated by people wanting to build their own machines that could build machines. Something you couldn’t easily buy.

Dogs would be more expensive to farm chickens, cows and pigs. They eat meat, so you need to produce meat to produce meat. It doesn’t seem like a sensible thing for North Korea to be doing to feed its soldiers rations.

In time where food is scarce it makes sense, but to actually farm them. They would have to be farming them as a ‘luxury’ product, in which case they aren’t going to be using it for rations.

It’s the most highly optimised software available for consumer computers. Much easier when you support a very limited set of devices which you have compete hardware control over.

It is UNIX so very similar to using Linux when you use a terminal.

The UI is very polished and very stable. MacOS has not changed how the UI works or feels in a long time, during which windows and Linux (gnome/kde) have changed a lot. Both becoming more like MacOS. macOS has changed a little mostly features and styling.

It has wide support, including support for priority programs that Linux does not. Apple appears and feels like they respect user privacy much better than Windows. You feel like you paid for the product and you are the customer. Unlike windows, where you pay to be exploited for data harvesting to the real customer advertisers. Apple is in many ways in between windows and Linux. Not as free and open, but not as exploitive and limited as windows. It’s a common misconception that MacOS is somehow locked down or walled off, it’s less locked down and walled off than windows. But like Linux it requires some terminal know how.

It was very likely a designers decision. It forces the use the use case they wanted; wireless mice should be used wirelessly. I would bet they fought marketing and management to get this on the final product.

Marketing would want the mouse they can advertise as being useable with and wireless. Female ports are easier to mount and manufacture with they have depth to set the socket. So a plug on the front is much cheaper and easier to manufacture.

The fact the charging cable doesn’t get used in motion means it will last longer and you wouldn’t have people useing fraying cables on the front of their mouse.

It costs extra to have hardware that can support the full spec on all ports simultaneously. The rear ports have the higher bandwidth to support screens with lots of pixels and a high frame rate, plus they are more likely to be daisy chained.

Maybe these companies shouldn’t be targeting children with their half baked products.

People aren’t individual islands completely disconnected, you can’t lay the blame on parents and children for people making and marketing dangerous products to children.

If you don’t use ai, then self driving autonomy is likely feasible in the compute power available in most of these cars.

The problem is sensors (like lidars) and software, that’s highly tested and validated. The testing and validation is the real issue.