If it is truly anonymized then it isn’t protected under GDPR.

Rosebud

Where’s the NATO equivalent

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_Security_Treaty_Organization
Headquartered in Moscow.

Now think for yourself why Ukraine would rather protect itself from being invaded by Russia than by the US.

Unfortunately that’s exactly how it works.
Look at any country’s border and tell me which ones weren’t established by violence.

The actual question is, what alternative to accepting Israel’s existence would you propose. Because forcefully removing them would just be one more crime.

Yes, opposing the establishment of a new state with a new population where someone else already lived would have been appropriate in the late 1940s.

Unfortunately it’s 2024 now, Israel does exist and time is linear.
So the only thing that can be done now is to recognize neither Israel nor Palestine should be erased.
(Though pointing out that the latter doesn’t seem to get mentioned here would be appropriate.)

Fractional-reserve banking

That has already become outdated, at least according to some economists.
Banks can just create loans out of thin air without having to check their own reserves first.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_creation#Credit_theory_of_money

Yes, one can argue that more fossil energy could have been shut down if the nuclear plants had continued operating.

That said, Nuclear was replaced by renewables. Coal was also replaced by renewables.
Maybe more coal could have been replaced but claiming that nuclear was replaced with coal is a rhetoric trick but it is literally not true.

Also these assumptions about replacing coal always seem to come from people who have no idea about the power of the German coal lobby.
Coal is just about the only natural resource Germany has and is a massive industry.
The coal exit movement is decades old as well. But as the graphs show it is also glacially slow due to massive lobbying.

You original comment was that someone “turned on coal/oil…”
That statement is factually and demonstrably incorrect.
Gas was not even part of that original claim but whatever.

Building capacity as a reserve for peak times is not the same as the plants actually running and producing emissions.
As the graphs show, the actual production and therefore emissions from fossil sources have gone down. This is what matters in he climate change debate.
The mere existence of buildings has little to do with the topic at hand.

You mean “Installed net power generation capacity”?
Because that measures how much could theoretically be produced, not how much is actually produced.

For actual production, you might want to look at the two graphs below.
Particularly the 4th one shows that gas peaked in 2000 and has not gone up during the nuclear phase-out.

turned on coal/oil…

Despite the internet’s insistence to the contrary, Germany has not increased its power production from fossil fuels.
It is in fact at the lowest level of the past 30 years
https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/germanys-energy-consumption-and-power-mix-charts

One of the best jokes to come out of the UN in a long time.

The ICC is not a UN organization

If everybody individually behaved correctly, we wouldn’t need any laws.
But as the entire human history has shown us, that is not the case. Which is why societies have passed laws even before recorded history.

Is that coal power plant producing plastic waste or are you perhaps talking about an entirely different problem that need to be addressed by separate legislation?

Employers in Germany have to bear half of the mandatory social security contributions.
This is on top of gross salary and includes mandatory health insurance.

I was just clarifying the original comment about the baseline not being 0.
Tbh, I hadn’t even looked at it properly and only noticed now that the timeline isn’t one month per box.

It’s a 32-34% increase looking at the graph

But you don’t get that percentage from looking at the graph. You get that from looking at the numbers.
The graph height increases by 300% in the last 3 months 9 days.

It goes from ~7 to ~11. That’s not even x2.

Yes but the graph goes from 2 rectangles above the bottom line to 8 rectangles above the bottom line in that final surge.
So visually, it looks like it has quadrupled.

Communism

Socialism, actually.

“we’re OK with what you’re doing with messaging right now, but only just barely”. If Apple does something the EU doesn’t like, new legislation can be written.

Because of the “only just barely” part, new legislation might not even be necessary.
If Apple only narrowly avoided falling under the core platform definition, just a change in market share might be enough for that to change under the existing rules.

So outright annexation.