vinniep
First, we should note that the term isn’t over. Major decisions on affirmative action and student debt, among others, are still to come. So it’s premature to evaluate the term before it’s complete.
Yeah, you can say that again
It’s down to branding. Prigozhin is framing this as a fight against the military leaders who have deceived Putin and caused him to make mistakes, but he does not blame Putin himself and is leaving room for Putin to change sides.
That framing aside, this is still a coup with the goal of overthrowing gov’t leadership by force.
I was also a little turned around when I saw a Google form show up.
I think the long-term answer here is for a native poll feature right in the platform. There’s a feature request for this on the Lemmy github project.
Until then, though, everything’s just a temporary placeholder solution.
Most of the west has already been dealing with this for decades, and the way they typically deal with it is through offshore manufacturing and immigration. The process has been to identify a low cost nation, build up enough infrastructure to work from there, move manufacturing to that nation, and then when the nation becomes wealthier and no longer able to be exploited, restart the process. We’ve seen this cycle with India and China, and now it’s starting to branch out (a lot of South American nations are being bulked up as “near-shore” partners that are cheap, but also in the same timezone and closer for shipping). Africa is another continent with a lot of potential future options.
What the ballot initiative was meant to do and what the legal wording of the initiative are are two different things, though.
there are a million and one ways to implement a standardized open protocol securely.
Right, but that work hasn’t been done yet, and moving ahead before that exists is a big risk.
Title’s a little click-baity there. The Massachusetts ballot initiative that passed is a poorly thought out security nightmare, so until those issues can be addressed it would be dangerous to follow it.
Now, according to Reuters, NHTSA has written to automakers to advise them not to comply with the Massachusetts law. Among its problems are the fact that someone “could utilize such open access to remotely command vehicles to operate dangerously, including attacking multiple vehicles concurrently,” and that “open access to vehicle manufacturers’ telematics offerings with the ability to remotely send commands allows for manipulation of systems on a vehicle, including safety-critical functions such as steering, acceleration, or braking.”
The title isn’t wrong, it just doesn’t mean what it sounds like it means.