thisislife2

    "The U.S.A... will be reimbursed, at the rate of 20% on all cargo shipped, for any and all costs necessary to do the job of providing safety and security to  this very volatile section of the World," he said.

Wasn't Iran only considering 1 or 2% (less than 5%) as the toll ...? Iran, right now, has a slight advantage over the Trump and Netanyahu administration as both are under pressure from their electorate, due to the looming elections. However, that also means both have very little diplomatic room as any concession they make to Iran will be showcased as "weakness" by their domestic opposition (whether it is or isn't). Which is exactly what happened when the "ceasefire" was signed, causing Trump to up his rhetoric.

Due to the huge trust deficit between the American and Iranian leaders, best course for Iran maybe to hold of all diplomatic engagements till the elections, even if that means they will have to bear the brunt of the American military for a few months more. It's a very risky approach as military escalation is very much possible (Trump has already managed to get NATO members approval for this current escalation) and they will also have to watch out for the Trump administration trying to revive the Abraham Accords and try and normalise relations between the Saudis and the Israelis (that seems to one of the options Trump and Netanyahu are considering as a way to politically salvage something from this middle-eastern mess they created - https://www.axios.com/2026/05/24/trump-iran-war-israel-musli... ).

But does it take 3 years or 4 years to get the engineering degree, after completing vocational training?

In India, you have two paths to earn a Bachelors degree in Engineering - the most popular one is to complete 12 years of schooling (i.e. high school), and then join a college / university to study Engineering for 4 years. Or, you can complete 10 years of schooling, and then join for a vocational Engineering program in a Polytechnic College. These are usually 3 years program. Once you get a Diploma from the Polytechnic college, you then become eligible to join the usual 4 year Engineering Bachelor programs. But, as you have already completed 3 years of Engineering study in a Polytechnic College, you are allowed lateral entry directly to the second year of the Bachelor Engineering program. This means that under both pathways, you get a degree in the same number of years - 12 years of schooling + 4 years for the Bachelors course = 16 years or 10 years of schooling + 3 years for Diploma Engineering course + 3 years for the Bachelor's course = 16 years. (Note that in both cases, this is in a regular day college, and not a part-time or evening college. Those who have done their 3 years Diploma Engineering courses, but also have to work due to financial constraints have the option to study part-time for a Engineering Bachelor's degree in evening classes too. But these usually are 5 or 6 years program if I remember right).

Wails is more like Tauri (Rust) - https://tauri.app/ - both use a WebView to render the frontend.

That is interesting! Wish more countries emulated the German education system as affordable education (and healthcare) is a basic necessity and a human right. I especially like the German vocational training "earn and learn" programs - not just the paid internship part but also how the course content is 20-30% theory and 70-80% practical. India, in association with the Indo-German business chamber, has now started offering similar vocational programs. One major difference though is that in India, this is formatted like our 3 year Diploma engineering courses ( https://articles.findmycollege.com/diploma-courses-polytechn... ). Thus, after getting a Diploma, one can also aspire to complete a Bachelors in Engineering in 3 years (i.e. if you have a Diploma, you can skip the first year and directly join the second year of the respective engineering course). I was surprised that Germany doesn't offer a similar pathway to a Bachelors in Engineering for its vocational program students.

Yes, it is a proxy war between NATO and Russia. But have they really pumped 600 billion dollars? I thought it was around 100 to 150 billions, so far, which isn't that much for the west.

> Drones flow to the most effective units

I guess that can work if the major battles are concentrated only at a few point. But what happens when it is spread out along a huge frontline? You can't really prioritise for "effective" if you also need to prioritise for "necessity"?

That isn't what the article is about - as a mature adult, would you like being judged or misrepresented based on your immature teen / youthful years and / or ignorance on any subject you had in the past? Obviously, no. That is why the "Right to personal data" and the "Right to be forgotten" is important.

When Indian army regiments, with predominantly Sikh soldiers, fight any army, they rally themselves for battle with cries of "Wahe Guru ki Khalsa, Wahe Guru ki Fatah" (which roughly translates to "[We] the pure are of the almighty, and the triumph in making is also of the almighty). Pakistani army, predominantly Muslim soldiers, do use the rallying cry of "Allahu Akbar". It's debatable whether these chants are meant more for themselves, than directed at their "enemies".

And if the British hadn't conquered and exploited my country, modern India wouldn't have been an impoverished country that is now a developing nation whose identity and culture has been forever changed due to European imperialism. The Islamophobia (and the general lack of respect for most non-western cultures) in this discussion is based on real ignorance:

1. There are indeed many things to admire about the west. However, for all the cultural and scientific advancement made by the west, westerners choose to ignore that the backbone of the current western "empire" was also built on the knowledge and wealth you looted from other non-western empires. The reason that you are now the most "developed" nation is because you now follow the same political pattern as all the "superpower" empires of their time - you hoard the wealth and knowledge now, and deny it to others. (Please read about the The fate of the Library of Alexandria - https://www.britannica.com/topic/Library-of-Alexandria/The-f... to understand, for one, how much knowledge was created, collated and valued in the eastern cultures - even by the "barbarian" muslim empires.)

(I know there have been books written in the west trying to justify that slavery and imperialism isn't why the west are wealthy. I partially agree with some points in them but disagree that the wealth that you stole was inconsequential. If the west truly believes that the wealth stolen from us wasn't what made your economies rich, but only your own culture and ingenuity, why don't you repatriate that amount that was diverted to your economy and actually test that theory? Mughal India, for example was one of the richest economies that accounted for 24% of the world GDP - https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5724162 - before the British conquered and transferred most of that wealth to enrich itself).

2. Many of you pretend (or rather seek comfort in the idea) that State violence of ancient non-western empires is something cultural to only non-western cultures. That western / Christian nations are more "peaceful" by nature. A study of the history of crusades, and western imperialism, should immediately dismiss that notion. (Shamefully, even today, many western nations sponsor and support the ethnic cleansing and genocide of native populations by your allies in Africa and the middle-east).

3. Some of you resort to selectively applying modern cultural perceptions to criticise historical societies. That is not how history is studied - one strives to understand history based on the cultural contexts of their period.

E.g. Prophet Muhammad didn't marry a 9 or 10 year old Ayesha because he liked to diddle young girls. During his time, puberty was treated as someone entering adulthood. While marriages may be arranged between pre-pubescent kids, it was only after they had reach puberty that they were allowed to consummate the marriage. Marriage to Ayesha was also political - Muhammad was actually forced to marry someone from every tribal leader's family as that was the diplomatic equivalent of establishing a political alliance during his time! (That is why he is an exception to the rule that a muslim can only have up to 4 wives). Note that even before Muhammad, Mary, mother of Christ, was considered eligible to be married to Joseph (an old man, past his middle-age) when she turned 12. She was still a teenager when she became pregnant ( https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/12317/is-th... ) - is Christ's father / God a paedophile too? By today's modern standard, you would say yes, that's ephebophilia.

The nomenclature of "Child marriage" or even "teen marriage" is a modern cultural phenomenon because of the advancement we have made in understanding our own biology (i.e. reproductive systems) and our changing moral and cultural norms on the ideas of sexuality. Despite this, note that most of the world still can't agree on a universal age of consent or marriage. For example, Japan only recently raised the minimum age of consent for sex from 13 to 16 ( https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/83755/why-was-t..., while in some parts of the US, an adult can still marry a teenager with the consent of their parents ( https://www.unchainedatlast.org/child-marriage-in-the-u-s/ )! My own grandparents were only 13 and 9 when they were married in the 1920's, a really common practice in India until the late 20th century, till it was made illegal and is nearly abolished now.

4. Some of you resort to judging other cultures by the worst members of their community. How would the west like it if only the Nazis were considered as their true representatives, and were solely judged based on their ideology?

Apple just doesn't do "enterprise" well - they need to poach some Microsoft employees to figure it out.

-> https://www.globalair.com/aircraft-for-sale/helicopters

Suggestion - instead of email, perhaps you can monitor which comments are favourited frequently and then curate the highlights from it? (I frequently do this when something is really insightful / useful to me). Making it easier to "favourite" a comment would also help here (currently it is an unnecessary 2-click process).

> Similarly, why doesn't Kyiv look like Gaza?

The stated Russian military goals are the "liberation" of the Donbass region and to enforce Ukraine's neutrality (i.e prevent it from joining any military alliance inimical to Russia). With the second goal, there is also the hope that future Ukrainian governments may not be as hostile to Russia as the current Ukrainian leaders and future Ukraine-Russia relations may be normalised as it was in the pre-Zelensky era. Deliberately targeting civilians, with a genocide in mind, makes that highly unlikely.

Note that for the Israeli-right, genocide is the goal because their zionist ideology is based on the settler-coloniser philosophy, and the population of the Palestinian muslims currently outnumber the Israeli Jews (when you include Palestinians that are refugees too, who have a "right to return"). The Palestinians also have a higher birth rate than the Israelis. This is a huge obstacle to the one-state solution - even the Israeli moderates on either political spectrum fear to make Palestinians Israeli citizens (which is one way of ending the conflict) as they fear Israeli Jews would then become a minority. The Israeli-right's solution to this is to make the Palestinian muslims a minority in their own land. (Akin to what the settler-coloniser Europeans did in Canada, USA, Australia etc. with the native population - this is corroborated by a UN probe that says Palestinian children and Babies were ‘special targets’ of Israeli killings - https://www.rt.com/india/642399-israel-gaza-babies-targets/ ). Moreover, as the Israeli-right are mostly religious fundamentalists and have already amended the law declaring Israel to be a Jewish state, they are also resolutely opposed to making Israel a secular state. Thus, in their political vision of Israel, only Jews can ever be a first-class citizen, while non-Jews are always meant to have lesser political rights.

> I think there are complex factors at play that prevent an actual total annihilation attack on the tail, even though it seems like it should be well within capabilities.

It's not about military capabilities but the political repercussions. NATO cannot supply enough weapons to Ukraine till they shift to a war-time mode. Moreover, they cannot allow Ukraine to use their territory to attack Russia, which is needed for successfully executing such an operation. (They have been "experimenting" in this area by ignoring Ukraine's drone intrusions into their airspace, as the drones move towards Russian assets). And you also have to ensure that you don't push the Russians into a corner as they are a nuclear weapon state.

With Iran, it is true that the Americans do have the capabilities to launch such an attack successfully. However, American allies - Iran's neighbours - fear that they will be caught in between the attack and bear the brunt of Iran's retaliatory attacks, specifically on their industry (oil and gas).

Thus, in both cases, it is mostly politics that holds them back.

For me, the most interesting bit of the article is this tid-bit:

> To survive in contested environments, the Army must transition from a centralized hub-and-spoke sustainment model to a decentralized network of smaller, dispersed, mobile, and signature-managed nodes. Sustainment elements must be capable of relocating with the same frequency as maneuver battalion tactical operations centers, while distributed caching of fuel, water, and ammunition across concealed locations should replace the current reliance on large, centralized supply dumps. This transformation must be paired with deliberate investment in camouflage, concealment, and deception tailored to sustainment operations.

That sounds very much like how the current Iranian military and para-military organisations are with their underground bunkers, warehouses and tunnels, with the ability to make independent command decisions in the absence of orders from central command. Even Iran's proxy, Hezbollah, is somewhat modelled similarly and that is why Israel's attack on Hezbollah's leadership (the pager bombing) hasn't had the impact that the Israelis hoped for - they are still bogged down fighting them in Lebanon.

"May". So many "mays" when it comes to food and supplements ... Sigh.

The South Koreans are opposed to any provocation - any military operation will immediately start a war and the South Koreans know that they will bear the brunt of it. Whether the South Koreans are involved or not, they will still be blamed and targeted as they have a military alliance with the US. Having emerged from an economic crisis, South Koreans are also very wary of a war setting them back again. And, like the previous Korean war, China and Russia will also likely get involved.

Russians and Chinese have a lot of investment in North Korea - North Korea opens ‘world-class’ tourist resort - https://www.rt.com/news/620717-north-korea-resort-tourism/ ... and they also contract a lot of North Korean to work in their country (ofcourse, it is more akin to the bonded labourer system).

And yet, they are very wary and afraid of unification due to the impact it may have on their economy. A unified Korea may become a "developing nation" again.

It's not the South Koreans per se that they have a problem with - it's the presence of the US military in South Korea that is seen as the real threat to North Korea. So if the South Koreans honestly want to repair their relation with the North Koreans, they will, at the very least, have to ask the Americans to leave. But the Americans will not leave because they have a hostile relation with the North Koreans, and they believe their presence in South Korea is the only thing preventing the North Koreans from throwing a few nukes at them. China and Russia will also not allow the North Koreans to repair their relations with the South Koreans unless they have guarantees from South Korea that they will be mindful of Chinese and Russian security concerns (which, in realpolitik terms would require South Korea to cut of ties with the US military and becoming "neutral").

You can use PaleMoon - https://www.palemoon.org/download.shtml

Yeah, I wish more people contributed to Netsurf and it gets the momentum it needs to compete with Blink, Gecko and Webkit. So many divided efforts in this area - there's Ladybird, Flow, Servo, Goanna. Even just improving Webkit and making it truly multi-platform (it isn't available for Windows, and the Linux version is apparently not as performant) would greatly even the field.

Have we come full circle now with China inspired by American Capitalism to create their own model of it, that now inspires the Americans to imitate the Chinese?

> Is your view that nothing can be done about the extortion?

Not really - see my other comments. I do however feel Iran would be justified in imposing a toll on countries that are hostile to it. Whether Iran can successfully do so is a different debate. In international law, often "might is right" approach gets away with a lot of things. If Iran finds the right political and military pressure, it could be partially successful.

> This would remain the case even if the US or others violated it;

Yeah, but laws are useless if it can't be enforced right? Trump claimed the US has first right's on Venezuela's oil. Apart from Venezuela, which other country has challenged that and promised to help them fight the Americans?

The US is a rich, developed country that is not fully dependent on the middle-east for oil. India is one the top importers of oil in the world and it is a developing country. Like for Iran, the stakes are very different for India vis the west or even China.

And note that the point the author was making was that India (for example) won't be alone in challenging Iran. It would soon become -a coalition of countries against Iran. Poor and developing countries, whose economy may be impacted would just be as much against the toll as the richer nations (as they have more to lose). And while some countries may be loathe to invoke a military challenge, they can retaliate economically - if everything Iran imports faces a Tariff, because of the toll, the revenue from the toll becomes meaningless for Iran's economy while costing it diplomatic goodwill of others too.

Iran's plan is ambitious. But it will be very challenging to pull it off without upsetting a lot of countries. Ideally, I think Iran should only impose a toll on countries that don't have good ties with Iran or don't trade with it. It should also exempt poorer nations, keeping in tune with its Islamic ethos.

> since they just need to threaten to destroy ships.

Here, you are assuming that those threatened will do nothing. Why? Even when India, for example, had some issues with piracy, they started sending their warships to patrol the route. That's the point the author makes - it will be difficult because if Iran is challenged, it needs to have the political will and military power to fight those who challenge it. You can't fight the whole world.

Flagged for the wrong link.

They do treat it as a "cost of doing business" as they do hedge between making a bigger profit through such violations vis the possible fine. But enforced fines like these serve as a warning that the government / regulator / judiciary are serious about enforcing laws and upholding rights. That precedent does discourages such actions because they know future violations will invite similar actions (the punitive fines may be worse for repeat violations) thus making the risks higher. The counter to that is political lobbying, if it is cheaper than the fines, and is also treated as another "cost of doing business".

(Even India has fined them 100s of millions of dollars - https://ssrana.in/articles/google-fined-anti-competitive-pra... ).

A few days back, Google reCaptcha suddenly showed me a QR code and asked me to scan it with my mobile to "verify" I was human. I was taken aback, and at first thought my system / browser had some malware that was messing with the Captcha ...

(Apparently, this started appearing from last month - https://cybernews.com/privacy/google-qr-code-recaptcha-requi... ).

Religious edicts apart, it's not that simple - in Judaism and Islam, not circumcising is also considered a health risk. (It's similar to the edict to not eat Pork). Obviously, just as parents don't let a child decide whether they want to brush their teeth or eat as much sweet as they want, not circumcising your kid is thus seen as irresponsible parenting. But yes, circumcising babies seems to be a modern phenomena. (I think this has happened because of the controversy / myth that babies don't feel pain - https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/q/7182 ). Originally, as far as I know, circumcision was mostly done to pre-teen (those nearing puberty). And is like one of those "puberty rituals" (celebrating the transition of one from childhood to adulthood) that are common in many cultures around the world. (In fact, the onset of puberty was treated as adulthood by many cultures around a century back, and thus teenage marriage was quite a commonly accepted practice).

That said, I also agree that there's a political angle too - some people (atheist activists, right-wingers, religious fundamentalists etc.) only use this for identity politics against Judaism and / or Islam.

Fantastic campaign. The "Go jump in some water before the data centres drink it all up" billboard on the beach doesn't mince words ... ( https://www.businessinsider.com/polaroid-anti-ai-data-center... ).