It's honestly so wild that these types thought Trump had some cohesive master plan that would all gel together nicely.
Like he told you the whole time that tariffs was basically his whole plan on the economy, and you thought there might be something more to it? From the guy who can barely complete a sentence? Be for real.
Yes, but sometimes producing for the public domain is their job. Sponsorships, grants, and other funding instruments exist for people who do work which is committed to the public domain.
Genuinely so disturbing that people are cheering this on, both in general and in the context of these folks being just regular people.
Provided that you're not throwing the excess out, it's not too bad? They're reusable but they do wear out eventually, and when that happens you can just draw from the backlog.
Alternatively you can always use them for other things - I don't keep 37 of them, but the handful I have I'm always using for stuff which isn't just groceries.
Not necessarily? You'd retain first-to-market advantages, particularly where implementation is capital-heavy - and if that's not enough you could consider an alternative approach to rewarding innovation such as having a payout or other advantage for individuals or entities which undertake significant research and development to emerge with an innovative product.
I think the idea that nobody would commit to developing anything in the absence of intellectual property law is also maybe a bit too cynical? People regularly do invest resources into developing things for the public domain.
At the very least, innovations developed with a significant amount of public funding - such as those which emerge from research universities with public funding or collaborative public-private endeavours at e.g. pharmaceutical companies - should be placed into the public domain for everybody to benefit from, and the copyright period should be substantially reduced to something more like five years.
Subscription-based models are a plague, but at least Jetbrains products eventually offer a perpetual fallback license for if you stop paying.
It's absurd that Adobe can just take tools you might depend on away after years of paying the subscription.
It's not as though the existence and mechanisms of piracy are a coveted secret. There's a decent chance that they'll learn about and attempt it independently, and the method they learn about online might expose them to greater risk than if they did it with more consideration.
On that basis, I think that knowledge transfer is at worst harm reduction. If it's immoral, which I don't believe it is, then at the very least your intervention could prevent them from being preyed upon by some copyright troll company when they do it despite your silence or protestations.
You might be thinking of the 1997 book Foundations of Geopolitics by the Russian ultranationalist and neofascist Aleksandr Dugin.
There have been many reports over the years that it's popular amongst those close to Putin - and there are definitely comparisons to be drawn between the book and actually occurring events.
Can't speak for them, but I've had a smart monitor which shows live consumption. Took note of the consumption while using the oven against baseline consumption, and the same for the air fryer.
Air fryer consumed approximately half the electricity for an equivalent amount of time in my case, but it's made better by the air fryer needing less time to reach temperature and cook whatever it is I'm making.
Not particularly surprised.
By most accounts they're very capable pieces of hardware, but the prices are way too high for current conditions.
Think there's also a case of incremental performance improvements in the form factor becoming less perceptible, and also more people favouring phones and tablets over laptops for everyday use.
Even setting aside that it's so unnecessarily huge, imagine having the utter contempt for others and self-importance necessary to park up on tram lines like that.