holowoodman

> except in some special circumstances (e.g. childrens' toys)

Don't nearly all electronics fall under it too, this is the second item after children toys in the link you posted.

No. That page just says: There are tons of EU laws about everything, including electronics. By putting a CE mark in your product, you certify that your product complies with all applicable EU laws.

In most cases, this certification can be a self-assessment, meaning that you can just assign the CE mark by whatever internal process you deem sufficient. I.e. you are allowed to rubber-stamp, but of course you are fully responsible for all consequences.

In some cases, for example childrens' toys, but only for some electronic components (electronic toys, medical stuff, high-voltage components, components that emit EM radiation above a certain threshold, ...), self-assessment isn't enough. In those cases, you need to obtain a certification from a notified body, which is an external organisation doing some design review and testing, as required by the respective laws.

It's all laid out further below under "How to obtain CE marking" and "Do you need an independent assessment?"

No, you actually don't have to do the testing, except in some special circumstances (e.g. childrens' toys). Generally, the "CE" mark is a self-certification done by the manufacturer or importer that certifies that the product meets certain (category-specific) criteria. You can do the proper thing, test your product and then certify it. But it is also possible and usually legal to just issue the certificate based on a self-assessment and deal with the fallout later, if there ever is any. That's how basically all non-EU manufacturers and importers get their CE mark...

https://europa.eu/youreurope/business/product-rules-complian...

Melting glaciers and ice caps is another such thing. As soon as the polar albedo changes because there is no more snow and ice, temperatures will stay elevated for a far longer time than it took to melt those caps.

Carbon sequestration through plant-life seems to increase more than expected with rising atmospheric CO_2 levels. We are currently seeing increased global plant mass.

We did try planet-scale geo engineering. It has worked so far, predictions were met. Heating through CO_2 and other heavy molecules works as predicted. Cooling through Sulfur compounds works even better than predicted, as evidenced by the sudden rise in temperatures after cessation of sulfur-rich fuels.

And in the end, all solutions we can attempt are technical and in some aspect untested. We just assume that the consequences of some of those solutions are small enough, but none have really been tested at scale.

It is also probably BS to assume a periodical die-off for humans in the near future. At the moment, humans are not showing any signs of a die-off, they are just not multiplying anymore. Humans do have something that animals do not, a culture. And this culture seems to have induced a downward variation in population.

It is also a construction thing. Air ducting is very rare in German homes. AC is also rare because frowned upon. And heating is usually provided by warm-water radiators or in-floor loops. But those radiators and in-floor loops are usually unsuited for cooling.

What's more, most heating techs only know about water heating and are unable to solder a refrigerant pipe. So it is hard to find someone to install a split AC or split heatpump, and your average heating tech won't even mention anything about cooling because he can't install it and your existing setup might have to be redone anyways.

You can get an appliance that can do both, well and efficiently. Every modern AC has a reverting valve that changes the flow direction of liquid and gas, such that the liquifier and gasifier change places. For cooling, the liquifier is in the outdoor unit, for heating it is in the indoor unit. Common refrigerants (for new units, the choice is R32 or R290) have a temperature range that works for both functions. Depending on the refrigerant the efficiency will differ, but in both cases it will be above 250% to 350%. Meaning for every kWh of electricity, you get at least 2.5 to 3.5 kWh of heating. Or cooling.

The easiest and cheapest way to get such a device is to get an air-air AC unit. More than 90% do have a reverting valve and can heat and cool. All of them will be efficient in both functions. Just look at the SEER and COOP values or the A+/A++/A+++/A+++++++ ridiculousness/efficiency scales ;)

Those air-air heatpumps/AC units can do both because they basically have the same radiator on both sides, and the same condensation removal system. Sometimes the cooling is a little more efficient, sometimes the heating is. This basically depends on the refrigerant used and on the local climate you are using the unit in.

Condensate is the reason that at least in Germany, you sometimes cannot do both. The usual heatpump you buy around here is an air-water heatpump. Meaning the outdoor unit is coupled via outdoor air. The indoor unit distributes it's energy through water, usually in water radiators or in-floor heating. Problem with that is that those water radiators are not suited to be run with cold water for cooling, and those in-floor heating systems usually aren't as well. Why? Because water will condense on those cold surfaces during summer, run off into your flooring and cause rot there. If you paid attention to make your flooring condensate-proof or have even more cooling surfaces from in-wall or in-ceiling loops, you can also run cooling this way. But most people can't.

So yes, you could do both if you put in a single air-air heatpump / AC. In certain rare circumstances you might also do it with an air-water heatpump.

Oh, and there is the theoretical option to do air-air and air-water with the same single outdoor unit and multiple air-based indoor units and one or two water-based indoor units that create warm water for heating and piping. Look for multi-split systems. But for the usual small single-family homes, those aren't cost efficient. They are therefore usually only offered for commercial applications such as hotels. But they have nice advantages like using the heat produced from the AC to heat the water used for the showers and stuff.

We do have quite a similar discussion here in Germany.

Back in the day, everyone used fossil fuels to heat their homes. Back in those days, AC was frowned upon as inefficient, wasteful and decadent. Something only Americans did. The greens despised them for ecological reasons. The right despised them for moral reasons.

Then the public came to know about climate change and it was decided that people should transition to using heat pumps for heating their homes. Because heat pumps are efficient, green and a necessary sacrifice of money you have to do to combat climate change.

Now with this year's heat wave, suddenly there was a discussion even among the greens about having AC in buildings as a necessary adaptation to rising temperatures. And demands by the right to get rid of the AC stigma and deploy AC everywhere. And back in the corner, there were experts laughing out loud, because a heat pump is just an "evil" AC running in reverse. Has been all along. The only problem is that usually heat pumps were deployed in such a way that you couldn't use them to cool in the summer...

Which imho goes to show that the public urgently needs more scientific and technical literacy.

-3.5 sigma in the middle of the year in the only graph the article has.

The article is crap as well as the graph. And the author made the planet simmer even more to produce this crap.

Thanks. Those are much better than the graph trash in the original article.

This graph shouldn't be front-page news. Why? Because it is a crappy graph that says nothing.

That there are deviations from the median is a normal statistical thing. Even deviations beyond 3 sigma. It happens. That's statistics. Those deviations might even be frequent more or less frequent than your statistics table says, because the data might not follow a gaussian normal distribution. See the graph, there is a -3.5 deviation in there...

What would be an interesting graph is: From 1982 to 2026 on the x-axis, plot the yearly maximum and minimum daily sigma and the median. Or just plot all the overlapping segments from the original graph as a continuous sequence. That way one could see periodicity, rising and falling of those values and the overall change over time. (Edit: see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48890590 for much better graphs)

But that graph is useless to convey any information beyond "well this year the line goes up". The article also does nothing to really explain the statistical background. Quite the contrary.

The article shows things that the graph doesn't illustrate at all: Like "This is why graphs like this matter [...] What they show is that Earth is moving beyond the range within which modern human civilisation developed.". Like fucking hell it doesn't! The graph starts in 1982! Modern human civilization started in 1982?

Like "The tropical Pacific is thus no longer oscillating around a climate that existed a century ago. It's oscillating around a much warmer baseline.". Well, and why then does this graph start in 1982? Why can't you show that century?

Like "The red line is this year. It doesn't just set a new record. It has departed entirely from the range of previous observations.". No, it fucking doesn't!. Look at the graph, there is a line at -3.5 sigma! Well within range. And even so, it's statistics, outliers are to be expected.

What this article and this graph need is a permanent relocation to the trash can. And a lesson for the author in science. Real science, not misleading propaganda that hurts the cause more than it helps.

The common thing is that there were no desired results because the west decided to do some half-assed thing and just go with the minimum amount of force and troops. Also, some parts of the west decided to start/intervene/participate, while others abstained. In short, nobody cared enough about the goals and about their respective western allies to go in with a heavy force, accept some losses and do the job properly.

Of course circumstances, reasons, participants and histories beyond that were different.

Old lines were never gone. All the talk about Europeans finally doing a common thing always carry some footnotes like "the Republic of France reserves the right to deviate in matters of military, security and production of sparkling wines and demands a 45% part in all tenders". Trump just needs to threaten champagne tax and France will surrender, or car tax and Germany will. Absent outside pressure, it is even worse. European treaties consist of more national exceptions than commonalities.

No, it isn't imho.

After the cold war has ended, the western nations focused on not giving a fuck about military strength, allies or facing opponents the size of Russia or China. Instead some small-time infantry campaigns like Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan were started and then basically abandoned without any decisive result or even with a total failure. But even back in the 2000s, there were no common goals and no real alliances, just some commitments to save face and keep up appearances.

So now, Russia in Ukraine and Iran in the Persian Gulf have called the bluff that is Western military power and decisiveness. I'm guessing those were just the first instances of a long line of wars that should have been prevented by the US-lead West, that are now possible because the West is fractured and aimless.

Requiring login after getting user input is a dark pattern.

This bad implementation of it makes it even worse.

I hate it with a passion and I will boycott services that do those inconsiderate things to me.

tactical nukes have never been used.

Two tactical nukes have been used, albeit against strategic (civilian, industrial, logistical) targets.

That's because phone browsers have the insane braindead default of scaling everything into tiny unreadableness. You have to explicitly say "stupid browser, nobody ever wanted this shit, behave sensibly by including <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0">. No idea why this idiotic custom still hasn't been purged from mobile browsers, but I guess it's just a valuable tradition now...

Before mobile browsers arrived, everything was fine and nobody needed meta viewport stuff. That's why this 1997 era page doesn't have it.

And yes, no more cross-border workers either way.

Well, that will be a problem especially for Swiss industry. Tons of workers from neighboring Italy, France, Germany and Austria work in Switzerland, commuting each day. They do this because workers are paid better in Switzerland than in neighboring countries. If those workers aren't available anymore, Swiss production of all kinds of stuff will take a huge hit.

For the same reason of wage differences, not a lot of Swiss people cross the border for work, and all neighbors are larger (except of course Liechtenstein, but that's a very special case anyways). So for those neighboring countries, it isn't that much of a problem.

Have been looking for something like this and will immediately try it out.

Logseq is cool, but the desktop client is slow and keyboard usability is low.

Also, my "favourite" problem: cleaning up git conflicts that somehow got into the Markdown via my Android phone. I'm syncing via termux there, and somehow I didn't quite get the script right yet...

- the tooling is decades behind, say, Rust or Go

No way. Where vibe-coded Rust contains tons of "unsafe", you can have your vibe-coded Haskell sprinkled with "unsafePerformIO" and "unsafeCoerce" ;)

What Prusa is that? Last one I've used (not my own, community lab), I had to level the bed using the sheet-of-paper-method. Which is the reason why I got a Bambu for myself.

Exploits are sold and used as weapons, sometimes even weapons of war. Which in many places is criminal, except under very restrictive circumstances.

Also, all kinds of aiding and abetting.

I can accept (and welcome) disclosure before there are patches.

But publishing a working exploit together with the disclosure before patches are available is really really irresponsible, maybe even criminal.

And no, the proposed mitigations don't help with half of the distributions out there...

The potential remedy doesn't work on RedHat and derivatives because the affected code is not a module there but statically compiled in.

IMHO all this whining about "layering violations" is stupid. One will always need some kind of layer glue, neighbors bordering on each other need to know something about each other, correlate addresses, etc. It is impossible to do anything practical without such violations. And it doesn't really matter if that glue protocol belongs to the below layer, the above layer or is a weird hybrid of both. Because in the end, the glue will necessarily be a hybrid and it will be specific to the combination of both those layers.

The only thing one should really really really avoid is the TCP mistake of not just having some minimally necessary glue, but that tight coupling of TCP connections to IP addresses in the layer below.

Mobile IPv6 support is theoretically possible. Practically, like so many cool things you could do with your network, ISPs won't have it. The best you can do is hide it from your ISP by using some tunnel, but then you might as well just use a VPN.

For instance, IPv6's NDP is built on actual IPv6 packets (ICMPv6), rather than some spoofed IP-lookalike thing. No layering violation, and, thanks to multicasting, no need to dump a bunch of broadcast traffic on the layer 2 network.

Only if the L2 network actually supports L2-multicast. Ethernet doesn't, except if your switches are intelligent enough. With cheap ethernet switches, multicast will be simulated by broadcast.

And actually, you can never avoid a layering violation. The only thing that NDP avoids is filling in the source/destination IP portions with placeholders. In NDP, you fill the destination with some multicast IPv6 address. But that is window dressing. You still need to know that this L3-multicast IPv6 address corresponds to a L2-multicast MAC address (or just do L2 broadcast). The NDP source you fill with an L3 IPv6 address that is directly derived from your L2 MAC address. And you still get back a MAC address for each IPv6 address and have to keep both in a table. So there are still tons of layering violations where the L2 addresses either have direct 1:1 correspondences to L3 addresses, or you have to keep L2/L3 translation tables and L3 protocols where the L3 part needs to know which L2 protocol it is running on, otherwise the table couldn't be filled.

Well, I can do that with OpenWRT, no idea which prosumer devices already implement this, but it isn't rocket science: Announce the Prefix of the currently active connection, invalidate the other one. Will interrupt all your TCP connections, but they are toast anyways, most software should handle this just fine. It's quite the same as a Wifi-to-Cellular handover.