The current state wrt to nuclear in Germany reflects a decades long consensus in Germany that spans the majority of the population, scientists, intellectuals, politicians and even energy companies.
Any opposition you do hear on this from within Germany is usually opportunistic. People are against the Greens so they just take the opposite position on their policy. A good example of this is Markus Söder (CSU) who flip flopped on this multiple times.
Realistically speaking there is no serious politician or party with a pro-nuclear position in Germany that has a plausible plan for leveraging nuclear power at meaningful scale in an economical way. Any such plan would realistically invite massive opposition because nobody wants nuclear facilities in their vicinity.
russians paid good money for this consensus! Best Chancellor money could buy. It was so successful Germany became a proxy paying French NGOs to torpedo French Nuclear program!
Edit: Actually should be plural - Chancellors. Merkel, big cog in NordStreams, went on some podcast last week to blame Poland for the war in Ukraine. See if only Poles didnt object so much she would placate putin with even more money.
The anti-nuclear movement in Germany started in the 70s. The last nuclear power plant was built decades ago. In my opinion the decision to not invest into nuclear and scale it up further made the end of nuclear power inevitable.
Recent governments merely organized a shutdown that was effectively decided in the last century at the end of the cold war. The importance of Merkel, Fukushima etc. in these discussions are completely overrated imo.
As an aside Germany got fuel for nuclear reactors from Russia.
That applies only if you take "memory model" to mean modeling the effects of concurrent accesses in multithreaded programs.
But the term could also be used more generally to include stuff like pointer provenance, Rust's "stacked borrows" etc.
In that case, Rust is more complicated than C-as-specified. But C-in-reality is much more complicated, e.g. see https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2263.htm
The model you're referring to, a Memory Ordering Model, is literally the same model as Rust's. The "exception" is an ordering nobody knows how to implement which Rust just doesn't pretend to offer - a distinction which makes no difference.
The whole point is that none of the main cloud providers runs containers directly on bare metal servers, and even their own VPS are resilient to their own hardware failures.
Then there's the whole debate on whether it's a good idea to put together a Kubernetes cluster running on, say, EC2 instances.
In practice these warrants mean that they cannot travel to any country that does recognize the ICC without being arrested, which means they almost certainly won't.
The fact that it's the only country he's been able to visit since the warrant was issued (aside from North Korea) indicates that, by and large -- it's working as intended.
"The fact that he's only been able to visit a relative handful of countries -- nearly all of which were traditional Cold War allies (and several of these being current or former vassal states) -- indicates that, by and large, the warrant is working as intended."
I count 12. However only Mongolia is a member of the ICC, 3 (Kyrgyzstan, UAE and Uzbekistan) have signed the Rome Statute, but have not ratified it, and none of the other 8 (China, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, Vietnam, Azerbaijan, and Turkmenistan) has even signed it. Russia it self has signed it, but, like the USA and Israel, has notified the Secretary General that they have no intention of ratifying it.
I'm looking at the bullet lists for 2023-2024, whereas it seems you may be looking at the table of all post-2022 visits (several of which were before the warrant was issued).
Just like how Putin couldn't travel to, say, South Africa, after a warrant was issued for his arrest. Oh wait, South Africa declined to enforce the ICC arrest warrant in that case.
I don't see this meaningfully constraining Netanyahu's foreign travel options.
It would be politically very risky for any European democracy to not enforce this arrest warrant, much more so than for South Africa or Mongolia. Israel is not popular among the public in Europe, and if a government invites him for a political visit, and don’t arrest him, that government will have to pay for that in the next election (and probably sooner, with mass demonstration and public unrest).
Now, lets talk about Putin’s visit to South Africa. So Putin was scheduled to visit a BRICS summit in South Africa despite the ICC arrest warrant. South Africa claimed they wouldn’t enforce the arrest warrant. People got very mad. South Africa, in response, declared that Putin would only participate in the summit remotely, where the arrest warrant couldn’t be enforced.
Now this was obviously a way to bypass the ICC warrant, and the stunt did not go well in the general public. In the next election the ANC, the governing party at the time, lost their parliamentary majority for the first time since South Africa became a democracy in 1994. Now South Africans had several other reasons to ditch the ANC, but this stunt certainly didn’t help.
In a great many other countries, including nearly all Western countries, the warrant is still in effect.
And even in the South African case: the government's decision was considered quite tenuous, which is why Putin cancelled his visit, in was was considered to be a major diplomatic setback at the time. So at the end of the day -- the warrant still had significant effect, and fulfilled its purpose.
Rust is more popular than all of these languages except swift combined. So it seems empirically that ergonomics and expressiveness don't matter that much or these languages don't manage to do significantly better than rust.
If you have better metrics then that's interesting, otherwise it just looks bitter.
Yeah, maybe chicken nuggets only appear more popular than broccoli. But I think since we don't have any actual evidence to say otherwise we can assume that's because they are in fact more popular than broccoli.
I would also add that what the question really really means is "Do they understand what we and I are doing here? Do they understand what they are asking of me? Can they emphasize with me?"
That's really important. It's annoying to constantly have to explain and justify basic things because people in power don't understand what the workers are doing. I'm also pretty sure that's true regardless of who you are, which company or industry you work in and what you do, you'd prefer to be lead by people who understand what you are doing.
It’s important for a technical manager to be able to effectively advocate for their programmers. Otherwise you just get constantly railroaded by the high priests of sysadmin or devops into technical decisions that make no sense.
My manager is not technical. The work environment is shit. Just a constant stream of brotherhood decisions that don’t work you are supposed to deliver systems into. The whole thing is bloody stupid but if our manager had a clue it wouldn’t happen. Before you ask, yes we try but the stupid bugger can’t stick to a script despite how easy we make it because the other managers constantly pull him into the suck of what suits everybody else rather than what works.
Yes, this is it. The goal of the question is "Do they understand what we and I are doing here? Do they understand what they are asking of me? Can they empathize with me?". And the meaning is simply if they have programming skills.
The article makes it sound like it the usage implies some devaluing of those who are not technical which is not the case (outside tech bro culture)
At this time we basically reset the db after each module run, but there is some flexibility.
Inside a test module, the developer has the ability to dicate whether the entire module should share the same db state, or if each individual test should get clean slate.
The main fixture is `database` which is set to autouse at the session level. This produces one db for the entire test session. This could easily be augmented to be scoped to the module or even function level.
You will see `truncate_db` which is currently set to autouse at the module level, so the tables are truncated after each module is finished. This can be totally customized for your own purposes.
I combined a few files to produce this example, but I still think it is pretty concise. We are using PostgreSQL 15.x at this time. Our migrations are perhaps unconventional - we just have a directory in the root called `migrations/` with files like 001_foo.sql, 002_bar.sql ... and we manually run them on deploys. So those same migrations get run sequentially all at once on boot.
The part here that would need to be modified for others are the `service.db` monkeypatching parts. That is our core DB module that everything else utilizes for grabbing a psycopg2 conn from the pool. The test monkeypatches these methods so that the rest of the codebase 'just works' and is handed this conn from the test container versus the traditional one.
Die Linke (far left), Greens (left), FDP (socially liberal-ish but economically further right than CDU) and AFD (far right) are against it. SPD (left) is internally conflicted about this topic. CDU (right) is in favour.
So essentially everyone who isn't very into law and order type politics and cares about civil rights is against this, regardless of where they are on the political spectrum. This is typical for such issues in Germany.
> So essentially everyone who isn't very into law and order type politics and cares about civil rights is against this, regardless of where they are on the political spectrum.
reply