Do you mean accelerate the digital euro plans?

No, your premise is flawed. According to your logic, all international treaties and bodies shouldn't exist either because great powers can ignore them at will just like how they ignore the ICC. The US for instance can ignore the Geneva Conventions willy-nilly and not be punished for it since to the US government, its own laws (which allow for war crimes) will always supersede foreign treaties, does that mean the Geneva Conventions shouldn't exist?

The ICC is a step in the right direction in the post-WW2 world, a shame though that repressive countries filled to the brim with war criminals cannot help but see it as an affront and such a threat to them.

And reducing exposure to US sanctions (for example by investing into alternatives to Windows or Visa/MasterCard) is an appropriate response for the affected countries.

> The United States has never recognized the jurisprudence of ICC anyways.

True, neither has China, India, or Russia.

I do indeed wonder why do they care about ICC considering they did not recognized it. One reason is that in fact that some of this "great powers" are much more "weaker" than they pretend, and that someone exposing something bad that they do will still have some effect on them.

Or (not sure if better or worse), they the "great powers" are stupid and they did not hear of the "Streisand effect".

The idea of foreign entities holding American leaders to account when Americans are unable to do it themselves is a fundamental emotional taboo for many.

The only reason the US doesn't like the ICC is because we have leadership guilty of crimes the ICC was created to prosecute.

We did have the Nuremberg trials to prosecute Nazis after their empire collapsed. The ICC is a formalization of that principle on more solid legal footing

Obviously its power is limited when it comes to prosecuting people currently in power or people that have favorable standing with their current host country. It can only make the live of those people a little less pleasant by issuing arrest warrants that limit their ability to travel internationally. But governments do fall from time to time, and when that happens the ICC provides a solid mechanism for prosecuting them for war crimes and crimes against humanity, in a way that is fair and has rules that were solidly established before the crime was committed

> would be appropriate to mention what exactly the ICC judges were punished for

I’m personally critical of the notion of the ICC, and I can’t come up with a legitimate reason we’d sanction them. America isn’t party to the Rome Statute. And the ICC has never even remotely threatened to do anything to any American.

They were sanctioned for doing their jobs.

They were sanctioned for investigating Israel's genocide of Palestinians.

Will they accept Trump $1 coins?

Europe does have domestic payment infrastructure, that's in some ways more advanced than the US. That doesn't matter because US sanctions don't depend on control of the infrastructure itself. They have a recursive structure: if you don't enforce US sanctions, or you trade with a peer that doesn't, then you yourself become sanctioned. FATCA works the same way, as did the deployment of the global anti-money laundering system (a US invention, largely).

what would be an alternative currently? i know of services like twint but this is a local swiss solution. any more EU wide established solutions??

My new vocabulary word for today: Hormesis is a two-phased dose-response relationship whereby low-dose exposures have a beneficial effect and high-dose amounts are either inhibitory to function or toxic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hormesis

The many war crimes the US has committed are the main reason they don't want to participate or recognise the ICC. They don't like it when their people get punished for their war crimes and will threaten their alies with invasion to make sure nobody dares to try.

Murdering people on international waters is not even the latest war crime, IIRC the Hague Invasion Act was created because of the war crimes they were comitting in the Middle East 25 years ago.

Trump isn't sweaty about the ICC. There is next to 0% likelihood that an American president would be sent to the ICC to be tried or something. Anyone who thinks that might happen or thinks the ICC might have the power to compel such a scenario is quite delusional or just misunderstands how the world actually works.

> would explain why the liar-in-chief is so sweaty about the ICC.

In what world do you think Trump even remembers about the double tap on a fishing vessel more than a day ago? He has no worry about anything, he has escaped prosecution for everything he's ever done, and I doubt he believes he might face a tribunal at the Hague, if he even actually knows what the Hague, or a tribunal, or the ICC actually are.

In progress.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49632470

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49225112

I’m trying to remember the last time an international criminal court judge came to my community and brandished a firearm while shouting slurs at me. It has to have been at least a few weeks now.

Concrete examples to verify such claims please? Also in civilized countries such things are decided by the justice system, not the government (which to the surprise of many simple minded people - like a certain US president and his fanbase - is independent from the government).

Are you saying the US government been implementing sanctions to make right wing activists not be able to receive bank transfers? That sounds like friendly fire and backwards, are you sure you understood the "source" correctly?

You mean right-wing terrorists? The ones that forcibly invaded the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021 and attacked police officers in an effort to distrupt democracy?

I think it's true but only in equitable societies.

Putin or Trump are totally isolated from economical and political consequences so they have no problem severing ties. If there are genuine co-dependencies, including for the leaders, they it's much harder to break peace.

I imagine the ideological aspect is the deeper motivation but it only matters with the right circumstances.

You can never rule out irrational acts. Merkel was ignoring the writing on the wall for much too long, it was pretty obvious that russia was on the war path long before she was still happily inking contracts that financed russia's machinery. You can not get a country that is already waging irrational wars to change their way by trading with them. But I'm pretty sure that for instance Trump right now is restrained to some degree by the certain knowledge that the US economy is at the mercy of outsiders.

I mean, we in europe did a a lot of trade with US too, and between other (then and still) EU countries, but the americans (and brits, and a few others) decided to attack Iraq for example ("Iraq has WMDs!"), and there were no sanctions and trade went on. And many other conflicts and bombings all around the world.

So it's not actually caring about the war and dead people (if we did, we'd do something about what israel is doing in gaza), but "us vs them", and russia is "them" while US was traditionally "us", until daddy Trump came along.

Someone probably told the EU politicians that russia will cave after a month or two of sanctions, there will be some kind of a "revolution" there, someone "pro EU" will be set there, and gas would be even cheaper.... A similar scenario was probably given to Trump for iran (just bomb the government, they'll cave, and you can set up a new pro-US leader there again).

But now you are not playing along either...

I do not know in this case, but I led migration and cost benefits analysis beforehand of very large Windows 3.11 to 95 to 2000; at the time there was nothing else that was considered useful and there still pain and massive cost. Later on we had to consider Linux as alternative; it just wasn’t close ; the stability (yep), easy of use etc was just not feasible. Now that Linux is good and easy to configure to basically be exactly like Windows and now that most custom applications of large corporates are web based and specific ones can be ran via Citrix for a few people who need it, I am guessing it finally is cheaper now. And 90% of users won’t even notice the difference; I remember when I was planning my first 3.11 to 95 migration that people were by far most stressed about users unable to open applications as they remember not the name or the icon but 2nd row, 3rd down is Word. Start, 5 up, 1 right, 3 down is internet. Etc. So as long as that’s the same, you are fine. It’s how most our clients still work so we take care never to move functionalities; only add, no delete.

No monthly fees and most software is available on opensource

windows -> linux mint OR reactOS OR OpenSUSE OR NIXos ( their choice) and many more

excel -> many of them as well as google spread sheet for free

Word -> Gazillion editors on open source; some much much better; and there is free google editor to boot

PowerPoint-> again Gazillion opensource replacements

Paint-> is a joke. Open source stuff is 10 times better

I don't want to advertise these products but you have access to search engines; look it up..

What is it that you think is so special? The only reason people are using the stuff is momentum carried from the past and PC being sold preloaded with windows.

In my opinion that is.

Didn't Schleswig-Holstein switch and make back the migration costs within a year?

Very much. There are a lot of hidden costs in computers. What does IT cost you? If everybody already knows the other program how much productivity is lost before they figure out the slight changes with the new (they will learn but experts will need time to become experts).

There's a strong case to be made that a lot of enterprise licensing is a roach motel model. Easy to get into and seemingly convenient, especially the case for support. Avoiding that trap will reap benefits.

Not just the foundation, the inventors of Nix and NixOS are Dutch too, it came out Utrecht University. Even the name is from dutch "niks" for "nothing", the snowflake came later and is basically a retcon.

As for practical use, sure there are some rough corners (this is true for every Linux distro), but I don't think there's any horrible showstoppers. In fact it's particularly well-suited for use by organizations (as opposed to private individual use) because it's great for making highly customized but reproducible setups.

No, unfortunately NixOS will prove unworkable. It's a classic case of bureaucrats making decisions about things they don't understand based on random political factors like where the creators are based.

Nix has numerous properties that make it unsuitable for a normal desktop OS:

(1) It has no concept of libraries being backwards compatible, so if a 200kb core library changes in a backwards compatible way e.g. security hotfix, it will rebuild/redownload pretty much everything you have installed. This kills your ability to roll out security fixes quickly and ensures that updates are far more painful for end users than even on Windows.

(2) Nix advertises its main benefit as being that you can easily roll back bad updates, which is just false. It makes this false claim because Nix treats user state as being out of scope. Try upgrading Postgres across major versions with Nix and then rolling it back and see what happens, or really any program that stores stuff in $HOME and doesn't support rollback. It'll just die, make a mess, and Nix will wash its hands of the affair by saying it did the bit it wanted to do (change the binaries on your path) and the rest is just out of scope.

(3) It has no working concept of native plugins, related to point (1). If two plugins depend on slightly different versions of their host program, they'll just load incompatible libraries into the address space and things will crash.

(4) It cannot run binaries shipped for generic Linux without lots of fragile hacks like binary rewrites. But in the real world lots of important domain-specific programs are shipped as binaries, if they support Linux at all.

> They previously used openSUSE and then Fedora.

Why did those not work out? Why do they think things will be different with NixOS?

NixOS (or rather nixpkgs) in its current state heavily depends on GitHub/Microsoft at the very least, and switching to anything else is non-trivial.

it makes so much sense. a small team of experts maintaining a rock-solid base configuration providing the essentials, which can then be built on top of for agency/department or even personal specifics - all declarative, immutable, cachable, testable. I can't think of a better tool for the job.

Golden image deployments and netboot have been around for ages. If you want an unified system and control the infrastructure, it doesn't really matter which system you use.

I'm not sure why they chose nix. But it does make it easier to carry local patches than a lot of other systems. I hope they succeed.

I'm glad online randos know better than people who get paid to do so. I wonder why theyre on the paid side..

I dont think Determinate Systems was involved, despite their proximity to the Netherlands (Eelco being Dutch). They work with American arms manufacturers, so I suspect that may play a role.

This is my fear.

I meant the EU, at EU level, not the Dutch government. Also it's not like the Dutch government can't cooperate with the other EU members like Germany and Luxembourg on such vital topics. Unless of course trust inside the EU is so lackluster that the Dutch government can't be sure where Germany and Luxembourg will stand, in which case it's already over for the EU.

For context, the US once prevented that a German company AIXTRON was sold to a Chinese investor in 2016 (perhaps for good reasons). To me it would sound like a good deal for the Netherlands and Luxembourg/Germany if Netherlands would uses SUSE and the Luxembourg/Germany would step in to keep in in the EU.

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/money/2016/12/02/us-blocks-chi...

Yeah well that's why the EU federal idea is and will be a failure. It wishes to be the challenger to the US and China hegemony in theory, but then every individual country wants to be its own special mini-boss in its own playground hoping they'll be at the top of the helm, that develops and uses its own separate things that will hopefully get adopted by the other EU members.

I think NixOS is also just much better suited for this particular job than SUSE. We use NixOS for everybody at work even though we're a German company.

There is a lot of inertia in the system, but US tech would be half the size without international customers. We've really slammed the door on our dick and the pain is going to be obvious.

The US had issue with the ICC since it first began in 2002. Multiple administrations saw it as a problem.

I'm probably wrong but I could have sworn there was an article that came out when Trump was elected something happened with data on microsoft accounts/server huh. I guess it's ungoogable right now. Might have just been hosted by US gov. Must have been funding related.

Anyway I don't support ICC grabbing power it does not have over other countries who do not sign on.

If the ICC wanted to be consistent they should target Hamas leaders, Iranian leaders, ect

And because Trump and co don't want to have to deal with such warrants against themselves.

It's the ultimate expression of US corruption. There's not even a pretense of fighting for justice any more, just fighting justice.

Maybe that's wrong?

The US can't even win a war in the middle east without NATO

What is the US going to do when China starts making their own moves?

The tricky thing these days is trying to figure out whether messages like this are coming from Russian or MAGA bots ;) In any case, good work comrade! Here's your potato / Trumpcoin. Now back into your troll cave.

People make it sound as if Munich flip-flopped on Linux. The then ruling social-democrats and the greens started the LiMux project in 2003! The social-democrats and the conservative christians ruling in 2020 switched back to MS Windows. The current administration is mandating open source but not specifically Linux.

I use Linux since the year 2000 and it has been ruff in the early days, no doubt. The desktop competition were MS Windows 2000 and XP, often lauded as peak MS Windows. Apple had all but disappeared. But 2020 I'd wager that average KDE desktop vs. average MS Windows 10 desktop would be a draw. Today it would be a KDE desktop win, but that's more due to MS Windows 11 suckiness than the leaps and bounds Linux made.

Do they exert any physical control (i.e. parts are made and shipped from North America), or is it just "Intellectual Property" and legal agreements that can be ignored?

This is an honest question, I'm trying my best to word it to not sound like a troll.

>a large part of the technology itself

A tiny fraction of the technology itself started as an ineffective "American" invention, copying a Japanese discovery/invention. In fact when ASML acquired the company, specifically because it couldn't do what they wanted and they needed to vastly improve it, a Japanese company had a superior product in the same space, but ASML saw the Japanese company as too much political baggage given how protectionist the Japanese often are.

How funny it all turned out, right?

OK, and how does changing your desktop OS help with that? Does NixOS grant you access to a locked bank account where Windows 11 doesn't?