At least in Germany it's the same. It gets ignored in the discussions concerning nuclear exit but it's actually the main reason why I'm not aggressively against it: we have save areas for nuclear storage but those fight bitterly to not have it.
The areas which are currently used are... Not good. Paying someone else (such as Finland) is out of budget for both state and energy companies. The latter anyway want to do the running but not the maintenance and the building, state should pay for that.
It's really white sad for me. The (true) statement that the dangerous waste needs to be stored carefully got corrupted to "it can't be stored".
Who should do this vetting though?
The internet was built up with the idea of technical neutrality - everything else came on top. TLDs came later and were used to either describe the origin of a page or its intended(!) use.
That leads to the case that not only can a propaganda outlet mark itself as "info" - it's actually historically correct to do so as it's about what the host wants to communicate.
ICANN, the organisation behind the TLDs, actually always struggles with this btw. A more recent example was the decision which domain should be reserved for local name services. It took y long time (I think years overall) to get to:
.internal (edited, brainfart)
Nah, you're doing the right thing: getting input when not sure. That's the way of learning!
Only one request: add the thoughts from this answer to the OP the next time please! Would make reading it a bit easier and better framed, at least for me.
(I.e. "I'm an authority in this field, look at this exciting news!" VS "my bullshit sensors tingle but I don't know enough. What are your thoughts?"
And still there are other people than you who want to do that full-time - and in doing so provide, at least for me, more value than the 6ooth marvel billion dollar movie.
There are educators and entertainers out there who chose this as a job and are good at it. If they could live off of it by going the patreon route instead of the shitty YouTube ad spam one I'd be all for it.
Uhm... Just for next time: stand up during the flight! Quick stretch or stroll to the bathroom if you feel weird just standing.
Don't punish your body for the planes hostile design!
If that's your intend than it might be better to pick individual arch wiki pages or improve the entry documentation. Many people refer to there from all distro because of its volume.
A "how to read tech documentation" could add value for this target group.
If you want something big I'd pitch nixos. As in the core distribution. It's a documentation nightmare and as a user I had to go over options search and then trying to figure out what they mean more often than I found a comprehensive documentation.
That would be half writing and half coordinating writers though I suspect.
Another great project with mixed quality documentation is openhab. It fits the bill of more backend heavy side and the devs are very open in my experience. I see it actually as superior in its core concepts to the way more popular home assistant in every aspect except documentation!
That's still like a hundred to one or even way worse. We can simply shove in (group reader doesn't like) until they are so full that they can't move any more and then pile on each individually and still have a few billion people preparing the lion BBQ for afterwards.
The bankruptcy scenario is correct but the first part isn't: you don't have X shares as collateral that you can liquidate. Instead, you have collateral to cover sum Y.
As long as the collateral contract covers enough stock positions the bank won't lose.
That said all of this is assuming standard contracts. If y bank wrote "0% interest and instead 50% of the revenue growth of Twitter" then this would be an easy way to lose money.
Haven't heard of a stupid banker yet, though, so what would the chances be?
At least in Germany it's the same. It gets ignored in the discussions concerning nuclear exit but it's actually the main reason why I'm not aggressively against it: we have save areas for nuclear storage but those fight bitterly to not have it. The areas which are currently used are... Not good. Paying someone else (such as Finland) is out of budget for both state and energy companies. The latter anyway want to do the running but not the maintenance and the building, state should pay for that.
It's really white sad for me. The (true) statement that the dangerous waste needs to be stored carefully got corrupted to "it can't be stored".