Israel probably doesn’t need a tribunal. Not because they didn’t commit war crimes or anything like that, but because this tribunal exists for one very specific reason.

When you read “Nuremberg-style tribunal” you probably thought “crimes so bad they had to create a new court for them” but that’s not really the case. Because after the Nuremberg trials the international community set up the international courts in The Hague to deal with crimes against humanity. Unfortunately they made a mistake. They forgot to include one crime in the jurisdiction of the courts. So, to prosecute this specific crime they need an additional court, while all other crimes will be judged by the existing ICC and ICJ.

The crime in question is “aggression”, basically the “crime of starting a war without provocation”. And that’s a lot easier to prove for Russia than for Israel, where the conflict includes other parties that also acted militarily.

I’m not defending Israel, I’m really not. All I’m saying is that the Israeli war crimes fall under the jurisdiction of the ICC and ICJ. You don’t need a dedicated tribunal to prosecute them. The same is true for Russia, except for this one crime that they definitely committed and Israel maybe didn’t commit. This one crime and only this crime needs a dedicated tribunal. That doesn’t make the other crimes any less serviere. It just means that the international community made a mistake and forgot one war crime when setting up the international courts.

Well, the ICC and ICJ are more than capable of handling most war crimes, including the ones committed by Israel. This tribunal would exist to fill a hole in the jurisdictions of the international courts: To prosecute the crime of aggression. Russia attacked first. It’s incredibly clear cut. Israel and Gaza is more complicated. Here we got a circle of escalating violence. That makes it a lot harder to prosecute them for this specific crime.

While most of Russia’s war crimes can be prosecuted in other courts, there is no legal entity authorized to rule on the crime of aggression — first coined to prosecute the Nazis for World War II — which means a dedicated tribunal needed to be established.

While most of Russia’s war crimes can be prosecuted in other courts, there is no legal entity authorized to rule on the crime of aggression — first coined to prosecute the Nazis for World War II — which means a dedicated tribunal needed to be established.

It would help if you provided a link or something. Because I have no idea what darling is.

“They” maintain it in the same way that they “maintain” Linux Mint. Which is to say technically they operate the repository that the OS is built from. But that’s misleading as the main OS is built by the German foundation as an immutable OS. That means that the OS packages are tested by the foundation and you can’t install everything else from the repo. Additional software comes in the form of click packages, which as you might have noticed, isn’t snap. Snap support is very much in development at the moment, but only as an additional package manager. Snaps are also mostly open source. The client, the thing that runs on your hardware is free software. It’s the server that’s proprietary.

M365 can be used with other 2fa apps. But organisations can force the use of Microsoft Authenticator

It’s not just crazy. It is itself arguably advocating for genocide

There’s also SoftMaker Office

It’s not open source and it costs money, but it’s European (German) and it has really good MS office compatibility

Sort of… It’s a different company that bought the name years ago when the old Atari went bankrupt. Technically it’s a French publisher formerly known as Infogrames.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/entertainment/canada-will-enter-2027-eurovision-song-contest-9.7254616

Blizzard’s position is that the subscription is for the use of the client as well as their server. A private server allows you to play without an active subscription, thus piracy.

The way I see it there are two possible reasons:

1. incompetence: The statement in question was said by ESA’s vice president for state government affairs, in other words a professional lobbyist. Video games are her day job, not her hobby. I don’t know how much she actually plays herself. It may therefore be the case that she wasn’t briefed properly or she got confused. The ESA is currently persuing legal action against certain private servers after all. The article contains specifics on those but in short: Those servers enable piracy, the Minecraft ones don’t.
2. they are lying: the whole thing was part of a hearing on Stop Killing Games. Private servers are one of the ways to fulfill their demands. It is the industry’s position that implementing those is too complicated. Each instance of private servers existing weakens the argument. So better pretend that those don’t exist. After all gamers won’t even learn about this statement. It’s a random California state senate hearing. They don’t watch those!

And they’ve been successful with that strategy (for now)

Regardless, the Protect Our Games Act did not make it out of this stage of the legislative process. With four aye votes, three noes, and four abstentions, it failed to accrue the majority of ayes necessary to pass. Nevertheless, it has been granted a reconsideration, so it’s not the end.

Depends on what the goal was.

• Keeping the AI hype running? Yes.
• Anything else? Not really.

Germany doesn’t but French McD has

There used to be/probably still is a Subreddit called “Linux for Noobs” that could act as inspiration

Elmo’s, diegeticaly (as in “in universe”), canonically (as in officially) three and a half years old. So if he was mentioned, it would have been as a victim.

Because in Trump world everything’s a zero sum game. The global profit of the drug manufacturers is set. Unchangeable, that’s the baseline. So if the US is paying too much then somebody else has to pay too little. That’s also why he proposed most favoured nation as a policy for drug pricing las year.

Of course he could also negotiate drug prices the way Germany does it, but that would cut into corporate profits