That would be a big "maybe" with at least as many interpretations as there are countries around the baltic sea. International law isn't as cut-and-dried as the usual laws within states that people are used to. Lots of international laws are more like traditions that got written down, where any major shift in circumstances (like a war, crisis, revolution, ...) will lead to a more convenient (for some) reinterpretation. Enforcement of international law usually happens through wars, so there is the additional complication of asking: "is it worth a war to uphold 'the law'". No real judicial and enforcement system exists, only certain kinds of arbitration courts. No international police to uphold anything. Only maybe the UN asking some states to send troops, if you really annoy the world and have no friends in the security council vetoing it.
It is a completely bonkers idea without any regard for local topography. First, the coastlines marked in red have been endangered by flooding for thousands of years, they have shifted with the storms over the eons, and in modern times, become fortified with an existing system of dams and additional protections such as river sluices, wave breakers and land-generating projects that extend the lands before the dams to protect the dams better.
The black line in Germany would cut off all of the shipping lanes and make gates and sluices necessary out there between the island chain. Where ground is totally unsuitable for that: The Wattenmeer is more of a tidal salt water swamp which goes out for tens of kilometers from the cost. Interrupted of course by deep cuts where the major rivers go out and shipping goes in. On the outer rim of the island chain, there is also a current along the coast that will make any major construction difficult, to say the least. Many islands struggle with that current reshaping them, for the most well-known example, see Sylt.
And before anyone says "well, they did it in the Netherlands", no, they didn't. The Ijsselmeer was a bay they cut off and drained, not an exposed coastline.
The realistic option (that is getting implemented over time) is just fortifying the existing dams. A few minor islands might cease to exist, but saving them won't be cost-effective.
Yes of course. But meanwhile, there are sibling comments spreading anecdata about how their digestion makes them more/less sad and out of the corners might come the quacks with their depression-curing essence of beneficial stomach bugs or something.
I feel it important to point out that most to all such links as in the original article are in the very early stages of being investigated. And no personal or medical consequences should be drawn from that, and a lot of caution should be exercised.
Maybe understanding that the gut microflora and immune system state "may" impact mental states ("we haven't gathered sufficient data") is enough to cause people to think about their own diets and health outcomes.
Maybe we don't need to act like medical professionals are the all-seeing, all-knowing seers in their golden cathedrals. I went to school with a bunch of premeds and biochemists. I know exactly what's up. The science is slow and people get wrapped up in their own egos.
There's enough information right now for people to change their diets, health habits, etc. if they suspect it may make a difference. Maybe in the fullness of time we'll discover it had nothing at all to do with gut immune cells, but I'm not going to suggest that people sit around and wait for the Godot of biochem to tell them it's okay to start thinking about it. It wasn't that long ago that we weren't even suggesting making changes to accommodate depression.
One of the smartest people that I know deals with suicidal depression. From an outsider's perspective it's completely illogical. I would love for them to continue trying everything in their power to escape it, because it's crippling and ruins their quality of life. I'd rather that than just saying med up and deal with it.
I feel for you and your friend and hope they get well. But especially with mental illness, you only have so many tries at a therapy before the patient gives up on ever getting better. So I think the "see what sticks" and "you might as well try X" approach can be more dangerous than most people realize, because it eats up valuable patience. So I'd rather prioritize such suggestions, and maybe try the ones that are known to be working at least some of the time, first.
VSCode might be the best thing since sliced bread. But for Microsoft's bottom line, it is utterly irrelevant. At best, VSC is a marketing win with a subset of the programmer population, but it doesn't even do anything for the adoption of "real" Visual Studio licenses or anything. VSC is more of an accidential side project gone right.
Microsoft is a very talented copycat. With the added expertise (that all the other FAANG companies are sorely lacking) of how to sell to enterprise and small business users and lock them into their portfolio.
I wonder if Microsoft is a talented imitator, but I think it can be said that they have a strong base mainly for customer companies, so they can easily spread their products by bundling them even if the quality of their products is worse than their competitors.
HTML and CSS are maybe the best UI creation combo if you only ever care about visual aesthetic design.
Any other aspects of what UI design is supposed to be about, ergonomics, usability, consistency, accessibility, internationalization is total crap in HTML/CSS. What is the taborder of your custom HTML/CSS datepicker? What will happen when I press <Esc> on your custom css popup? What is the keyboard shortcut to highlight that form field or to open that hamburger menu? How will my screenreader pronounce that hamburger symbol? Will it be the same for the next great HTML/CSS creation? Will the date format follow my locale?
HTML/CSS is great only if you are the strictly visual aesthetics kind of "designer" who only care about reproducing their napkin drawings and photoshop mockups. For all the other things one would ask of a proper UI, HTML/CSS is either useless or actively detrimental.
The matter isn't the binary size of the update. It is the size of the crowd of people and parties involved in the update: For a bunch of statically linked applications, you need to involve all the application people/vendors. For a bunch of dynamically linked applications depending on a shared library, you (ideally) just need to involve the one library's people/vendor.
And "involve" might mean: wait for a bunch of unresponsive external parties to produce a new binary each for a security issue they might not care about. Of course on very different timelines, etc.
Open them, heat treat the disks in a bonfire, use the magnets as fridge magnets (those are quite strong, can fix entire books to the fridge instead of just notes).
I think you are right in that it is quite impossible to read data that has been overwritten from a sufficiently modern HDD.
But all modern HDDs retire sectors that exhibit a higher correctable error rate and replace them by reserve sectors. Those retired sectors then still contain readable data (maybe with some bit errors) if you know the appropriate factory mode commands. Overwriting the entire disk also won't overwrite retired sectors, except if the disk has an explicit function for it and you trust that function to work properly.
