They are recorded in multiple different events (repairs at a professional service, oil change, inspections, etc.), but as a buyer you would have to become active, ask for and check the papers, contact past owners, inspect the car, etc.

Because changing the odometer is easy and cheap, and can raise the price at an average of 3000€ per car, it is done rather often and not discovered in many cases.

While there are laws against it, the implementation of more manipulation resistant odometers by the car vendors is still not there yet broadly.

Source: https://www.adac.de/rund-ums-fahrzeug/auto-kaufen-verkaufen/gebrauchtwagenkauf/tacho-manipulation/

What do you mean with “not enforced”? Do you mean that people that find manipulated odometers with proof go to court and then nothing is done?

I get that it is sometimes difficult to proof a manipulation of the odometer, and that fraud here is pretty wildly spread, and maybe more prevalent in Germany compared to France, but that doesn’t mean that other countries are not doing it.

I would also agree that anyone should prefer buying from local sellers first, but just saying that this is a special issue that only Germany has to deal, because they do not care about the law and order is wrong.

This is the same logic that some people on the right have: “Crimes happen more often in cities, and the reason for that is that they do not care about the law there.”

This is misleading, it is illegal in Germany, if it is about changing the odometer to a wrong record, and only legal to correct it, if it was broken or is replaced.

It is illegal in Germeny, if the purpose is to falsify it, and legal to correct a wrong record: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stvg/__22b.html

What you consider masculine or feminine behavior is mostly socially constructed.

There are these myths that only men where hunters while women where only gatherers, which turn out to be false. Women and men both hunted and gathered. Link

IMO, the real issue is that current society places to much attention to gender roles, and for men it is done it in a way that makes it difficult and contradictory for young men to find their place: “You are a ‘man’, and you have to behave this specific way, however if you do that you are bad and will have trouble finding a partner. However if you do not behave like a ‘man’, you are weird.”

The conservative gender roles don’t only hurt women, they hurt men as well. And dating and finding a good partner sucks for everyone.

Well, it just depends on your use-case. Sometimes new games or applications require newer drivers or directly a newer Windows version. This is something you just have to be aware of.

At least that was a reason I switched LTSC Windows over to Enterprise for some people.

You might likely run into issues with GPU (and other) windows drivers, which might stop supporting old windows 10 versions. At least that happened already with LTSC/LTSB. I expect this to happen especially when ordinary windows 10 EOL is reached.

That is true, but it also isn’t a counter argument to what I said.

Just because the right-wing people are crazy and do not argue based on logic, but on confirmation-bias and personal preconceptions, doesn’t mean that the reality itself has liberal bias. There are other ideologies that argue based on logic and observable facts, but are not ‘liberal’, many social-democrates (or democratic-socialists) for instance, IMO.

Good code documentation describes why something is done, and no just what or how.

To answer why you have to understand the context, and often, you have to be there when the code was written and went through the various iterations.

LLMs might be able to explain what is done, with some margin of error, but why something is done, I would be very surprised.

Nah, reality doesn’t have a liberal bias. “Liberal” is something that humans invented, and not something that comes from reality or some intrinsic part of nature.

LLMs are trained on past written stuff by humans, and humans for a long time have not been ridiculously right wing as the current political climate of the US.

If you train a model on only right wing propaganda, it will not miraculously turn “liberal”, it will be right wing. LLMs also argue not more logical than any propagandist, if they were fed by only propaganda.

I dislike it immensely when people argue that LLMs are truthful, unbiased, or somehow “know” or can create more that what was put into them. And connecting them with fundamental reality seems even more tech-bro-brained.

Arguing that “reality” is this or that is also very annoying, because reality doesn’t have any intrisic morales or politics that can be measured by logic or science. So many people argue that their morales are better then someone else’s, because they where given by god, or by science, this is bullshit. They are all derived by human society, and the same is true by whatever “liberal” means.

And lastly, assuming that some system somehow is “built into reality” shuts down any critique of the system. And critiquing any system in order to improve it is essential for any improvements, which should be part of any progressive thought.

I think you are mixing up SFP and optical fiber. SFP modules with copper wires exist, and are common. (e.g. SFP 1000base-T modules)

You can also use optical fiber without SFP, like the toslink connection.

Optical fiber also has issues with requiring a larger minimal bend radius, because they easily break. So you have to handle them more carefully.

SFP? You mean the every device has slots to plug in different transceiver modules? I guess that would make it more future proof, but I think that will raise the cost, and might confuse ordinary people.

You have to think about the slot-transceiver compatibility and transceiver-medium compatibility then. Hmm… but I guess that would make it more transparent what is going on than having those chips embedded inside the cables, but not sure if we can leave them out, and require the end users to take care of thinking of all these compatibilities themselves or risk fire hazards.

Well my point is that pretty much all of our laws are build around ethic values, which are developed within a society. There is no logical or scientific reason that would make killing other people bad, but we still should have strict rules about this.

Laws are always built around soft things like “what is obscene”, “at what point is someone naked in public”, “How much alcohol can a drink have before it is a alcoholic beverage?”, “did the person die of natural causes, or was killed by some event years ago, that wasn’t properly treated.”

Society decides what is acceptable and what isn’t and that changes through time and culture.

Your argument is therefore not a good one, you have to make a case based on ethics.

This sort of reminds myself on the discussion on “what is a women”. Is Siri a women? Many might say so, but t the same time Siri is not even human.

The question on how old the person on a specific generated image might be and if it even depicts a person at all, can only be answered through society. There is no scientific or any logical answer for this.

So this will always have grey areas and differing opinions and can be rulings in different cultures.

In the end it is about discussions about ethics not logic.

I suppose some of that comes down to the personal understanding of what “smart” is.

I guess you could call some person, that doesn’t understand a topic, but still manages to sound reasonable when talking about it, and might even convince people that they actually have a deep understanding of that topic, “smart”, in a kind of “smart imposter”.

I thought that MinIO is a Open-Source S3 implementation, which you can just install on your own system. S3 is a “protocol” here IIUC.

Is your complaint that they are using the S3 protocol, because it was invented and is controlled by AWS?

Or that some services might use it without MinIO, directly on AWS?

But as long as they are RISC V chips, then they would run the same software as any other RISC V chips.

Not necessarily, RISC-V is permissibly licensed, so they could add proprietary extensions, that would make the binaries or even compilers only work with their implementation of the RISC-V ISA.

Embrace, Extend, Extinguish tactics would work on RISC-V, and I trust billionaires and huge corporations to enshittify it.

Big player joins RISC-V, creates design, introduces proprietary extensions, builds compilers that use them, software depend on them, other RISC-V designers need to license them, because the whole platform now depends on them.

Also based on how complicate it is to port Linux to different SoCs, which at least share a common ISA, it will be much more difficult if you need to support even more RISC-V ISAs with different proprietary extensions, not only in the kernel, but in the toolchain as well.

So a bit like extending Mozilla Application Suite aka Seamonkey instead of focusing on standalone products?

AFAIK, UEFI isn’t technically a requirement. However, TPM 2.0 is, and that requires UEFI.

TPM 2.0 does not require UEFI. I have a system here with TPM 2.0 and only legacy boot support. And you can just buy a TPM 2.0 module and connect it with any board, that has a SPI connector.

TBH, it is very difficult to me differentiating between the different flavors of authoritarians.

Maybe someone can make an easy to understand comparison matrix? You know, “Kills people because they have a different opinion.”, “Suppresses minorities.”, etc.