Besides providing verbatim records of who said what, there is a second can of worms in forming any sort of binding agreement if the two sides of the agreement are having two different conversations.
I think this is what the part about the missed nuance means.
France has plenty of nuclear power.
It doesn’t help with renewable peaks in the slightest.
What is needed are storage solutions and flexible usage that can utilize cheap power at peak times.
That’s why the button says “purchase” instead of “buy”
First off, they’re synonyms
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/purchase#synonyms
Now, I’m certainly no expert on the US legal system. It certainly seems silly if you could circumvent entire laws just by using synonyms but what do I know.
However I have been talking about other countries where that is not the case and where the language is not English.
So It really doesn’t matter whether it say “buy” or “purchase” in English when it’s “kaufen” in German or “acheter” in French.
at the moment every single counrty must agree to a decision
The EU treaties have already changed, so that many decisions can be made by qualified majority.
Unanimity is only still required in certain fields:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_in_the_Council_of_the_European_Union#Unanimity
Why is ‘threatened’ in quotation marks?
You typically don’t get “ownership rights” when you purchase a game on Steam. You’ll typically be purchasing a licence to play the game, which could be taken away at any point.
That is certainly what Valve thinks and writes in their TOS but if their store has a big button that says “BUY HALO” then courts may very well decide that you actually bought Halo.
And many countries have a strict legal definition of what buying means that cannot be overruled by some company’s TOS.
This is explicitly against their TOS. Whether or not you’ll be found out is a whole other matter
Also whether or not those TOS are legally enforceable in every single country Valve operates in.
Piracy is a service problem
I mean, it seems they want to focus on the outcome not the reason so the title is pretty much on point.
“Mao wasn’t a communist in 1953 because his country hadn’t completed its first five year plan yet” is one hell of a claim.
One hell of a straw man, you mean.
At what point have I denied that people are communists?
Mao may be a communist and follow a philosophy called communism but China has not established a social order called communism as envisioned by communists.
A country […] under a revolutionary socialist government is still communist
I would argue that in a world where the terms are not synonymous, socialist countries are in fact socialist, not communist.
at least in so far as its following the roadmap
Following a roadmap to some target literally means that you have not yet achieved that target.
The argument is not that their are no communists, the argument is that they have not established actual communism, therefore the states they govern are not communist states.
Whether or not they want to establish communism does not factor into it.
To claim otherwise would be akin to claiming that a company on a roadmap to profitability is already profitable, while actually still losing money.
I mean, OP asked specifically why comments don’t come from
people that never lived in a communist state
So I addressed the non-existence of communist states.
True, there can be smaller communist societies but I think OP was asking more on a USSR level scale and not 12 hippies living on a farm together.
You’re not going to break the Cuban blockade. You’re not going to settle the endless territorial disputes plaguing Vietnam. You’re not going to undo the legacy of generations of apartheid in South Africa overnight. You’re not going to Make the USSR Great Again.
So maybe save yourself some angst and stop trying to tell Nicholas Maduro and Kim Jung Un how to do their jobs
All these "you"s make me think that you might addressing me personally.
I make no claim to solve anything, nor how anyone should do their job.
I have provided an (incomplete) explanation as to what communism is, why it does not actually exist in practice and why therefore people commenting cannot be from a communist state.
every “communist” when pushed will take position on atrocities committed by various communists regimes… they gonna do that thing that “fascists” do: “well he really did not do it but if he did, they clearly deserved it”
I have never encountered that argument. Is that something Tankies say?
What I have seen is the often mocked argument, that these regimes were not communist in the first place.
Actual communism has never existed and probably never will.
There are however plenty of communists that will openly denounce stalinism. That is the entire premise of Animal Farm, btw.
Communism is by definition a society without a state, so nobody has ever lived in a communist state and I doubt there has ever been a communist society in recorded history.
there is a difference between the end of a LICENCE and the end of something’s functional life?
This may be somewhat pedantic but the plant’s functional life ended when the license ran out.
The planned/ hoped for EoL may have been longer but if there was a 40 year license then the end of that license is also the end of the initially licensed lifetime. Otherwise they could have just issued a 50 or 60 year license.
That doesn’t mean lifetimes cannot be extended, many plants run longer than initially planned.
But not renewing a license is hardly a premature shutdown,
But NONE of that means that the plant was some falling apart scrapheap that needed closed
As already stated, I didn’t make any argument about its functionality and it has no bearing to my argument.
That said, other have claimed that the plant was apparently leaking, which does sound like an argument against renewal.
I never claimed that the license couldn’t be renewed nor that it wouldn’t be running fine.
The license period had a pre-determined END and it’s LIFEtime has not been extended.
Surely the very existence of a time limit to the license must mean that the option to not renew it after a certain time has been anticipated when the license was originally issued.
And for all that it does not matter, whether that was the correct decision or not, whether other plants had their licenses renewed orwhether these other plants are operating just fine.
If they had to apply for a renewal, then their old license ran out.
That is exactly what EOL is.
You have a million to one chance, roll 6d10.
That has already become outdated, at least according to some economists.
Banks can just create loans out of thin air without having to check their own reserves first.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_creation#Credit_theory_of_money