Hey and in Freiburg they just cancelled the LEZ because the air quality improved…

Security services use things like airgapping, but our politicians talk to each other using WhatsApp…

So now that is in the hands of the folks who use the OSM data. It’s in a somewhat exotic tag, so by default any map that uses OSM will still show Gulf of Mexico, unless they actively intervene to show Gulf of America. So if you see an OSM based map showing the latter, you know they made that choice consciously.

OpenStreetMap also needs to deal with this kind of thing. In this case, several people already tried to add it to the map in some form of other, but generally not as something to actually be shown. There is a looong discussion about it here https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/gulf-of-america-gulf-of-mexico/124571 . General opinion is that it is (or will be) “the official name that the US says it has”. In OSM you can invent tags for anything, so an object can have many names. Done like this, anyone using the data can still choose to give precedence to any “official US names that are not in common use yet”. Later it may be upgraded ased on if it becomes a common alternative name, just in the US, or maybe beyond. All those options can have their own special tag. And only very motivated data users will ever show it to map users. But if you do a search for Gulf of America, you will be able to find it.

Oh I thought you were worried about the hill. I do 40 minutes myself and prefer it over any other option

Ebike is your friend

Someone should invent a game, that while playing demonstrates how much monopolies suck for everyone involved (except the monopolist)

That’s a short but touching poem.

Preventable, but they still happened, even with the crazy security at plants. But what you’re saying is like “we’ve only had small earthquakes so far, so there are likely to be no big ones”. When it’s really absolutely the other way around.

The danger of nuclear isn’t so much on the daily stats of what actually went wrong, but in the tiny risk of having huge problems. The worst case scenario for a Chernobyl style disaster is actually losing huge parts of Europe. Even in well run plants, if enough things go wrong at the same time, it could still mean losing the nearest city. These “black swan” events are hard for humans to think clearly about, as we are not used to working with incredibly small chances (like deciding to plan for a 1000 year storm or not).

“Made unusable”: that’s not how it works. Even with occasional vandalism, there’s so much more people positively contributing, that overall the map just keeps on getting better and better.

IIRC, this actually happens. When the balance is disturbed, the mushrooms go wild and destroy young sapplings. Could be I recall incorrectly and it’s actually other species. I cannot recommend The Mother Tree enough, it goes into great detail of the history of research into this

Heh, I get it. I don’t really want flying cars. I want walkable cities and cycling highways. But I do feel a bit nostalgic for a future we didn’t have where at the very least we would have some serious exploration of Europa by now (and some other likely candidates for alien life).

Don’t judge me for wanting a nuclear flying car!

Oh come on, projections from the sixties had us having huge space colonies by now. Growth in the exploration sector has been anything but exponential.

Switching to agriculture was the opposite of lazy. It was much harder work for a poorer standard of living. The issue was population pressure simply did not allow the old way of life anymore.