Yeah, but the Prussian led is the crucial bit there. Austria wouldn’t have had one bit of a problem with a German Reich led by the Austrian monarchy, which is conversely something Prussia was unable to accept. Catch-22 type situation. Hence the split.

Well it’s not like Austria put up much of a fight… But anyway, my larger point was that Hitler, like many other people on both sides of the border, was explicitly opposed to the national distinction between Austria and Germany. They thought that the founding of the German Reich to the exclusion of Austria in 1871 was a mistake and that Austria should be part of Germany. So saying that somebody born in Austria, who believes Austria is part of Germany, is “a fully integrated German” (as opposed to Austrian) doesn’t make much sense I think.

Hitler was a fully integrated German.

What’s that even supposed to mean? He Anschluss’ed Austria basically the first chance he got.

only to cave to Microsoft soon after?

LiMux ran for 13-16 years, depending on how you want to read it. And after the 2017 cancellation the government in 2020 decided to “use open standards where possible”.

I’m not denying that there are such people around, but I don’t really think they are in the majority. Most of the specific things you mention I saw coming just as much if not more from other servers.

I mean I have seen that accusation thrown around a lot, but from what I remember it was a few cases a long time (years?) back. But yeah to be honest I haven’t really been paying attention, so if you have evidence to the contrary feel free to let me know. The goals and rules of the server as stated seem fine to me, and I haven’t seen anything that really deviated too far from that.

Anyway, like I said I may not agree with every moderation decision, but I probably wouldn’t on other instances either. Didn’t your instance just defederate the Germans for their heavy-handed moderation of anything remotely antisemitic? I mean I would get it with any other instance I guess, but your users didn’t get why the Germans would be a bit iffy with this stuff?

Well I can’t speak for others, but I’m on lemmy.ml because the instance says it’s “A community of privacy and FOSS enthusiasts, run by Lemmy’s developers”. And in my experience that pretty much checks out, for all the talk I see from others about how it’s a den of authoritarianism and whatnot the actual amount of that I see on the actual instance is minimal. Yeah moderation sucks sometimes, but so it does on most every other instance though. Their approach to defederation seems to be avoiding it, and I don’t have to see any Nazi stuff or shit like that, so I’m good for now. Pick your poison.

The West has many flaws. But our flaws are nothing compared to these guys.

Well if you look a bit closer at the history of the cold war you will find that “the West”, mostly in the form of the CIA, destroyed a lot of nascent communist or even just social democratic governments worldwide through covert means, and sometimes even militarily. In the face of such a threat you are basically forced to become even more authoritarian, if you want your communist government to survive that is. So “the West” instituted a process of selection through political (and military) pressure if you will. Hence why there are no surviving liberal communist states left to discuss.

Anyway, I don’t think there is much of consensus here on lemmy.ml whether these countries are good or bad (or even something more nuanced). What I think often happens is that someone voices “critical support”, as in they say something like “Iran has a right to self-defence” although they don’t agree with everything else Iran does, and someone from another instance comes along to read it and confirmation-biases that into “typical lemmy.ml user, fully supports that theocratic regime”.

I mean just look at the straw man you build in your OP, supposedly I’m supporting the Islamic regime in Iran, and the anti-Islamic regime in China!? Bit of a stretch there mate…

This kind of behavior simply isn’t possible under anything that can be described as an occupation.

Well if its still a de jure occupation, by virtue of other countries having rights over the subject country, I think that alone already makes it fair to still call it an occupation. If the occupying powers furthermore do in fact still have active military deployments in the country I am beginning to wonder how you could not call it a military occupation.

This is incorrect. Occupation ended in West-Germany in 1955, […] exceptions: The right to station troops […] even without explicit consent from the West-German government

Lol, the occupation ended, except it didn’t end. Yeah ok. The actual end of the Allied Control Council was in 1990/1991, following the two+four treaty and reunification. That’s when the US (and others) lost rights to station troops in Germany at their discretion and Germany was granted full sovereignty. And until then there had been occupation troops there, doesn’t matter that they had been much reduced compared to the first ten years.

the US didn’t just flippantly “figured something out”

I didn’t say figuring out, I said figuring. Presented with two choices, close everything down or pay rent, they chose the latter.

but kept it active as both a logistics center […] and as a deterrent against Russia

Which was all I said, so we agree essentially: “why not rent already existing bases instead of building new ones elsewhere”

Ignoring the rhetoricity of the question: The military occupation of Germany after WW2 lasting for 45 years (1945-1990/1991) resulted in a lot NATO-standard military infrastructure being already established throughout the country; So when the occupation officially ended the US essentially just figured “why not rent already existing bases instead of building new ones elsewhere”.

Man fuck Axel Voss! Damn copyright shill. Guess we can take solace in the fact that he seemed to be the only one clearly taking the publishers side here.

And if I’m not mistaken, the European Commission representative argued in his reply to Voss (around 12:20) that “collective management organisations” or “cultural heritage institutions” might well be allowed to preserve games that are not commercially available anymore already under the current framework.

Bad news buddy, that’s exactly how you become a programmer. /irony

cool-new-thing factor: KDE plasma 6!

I found the “Fall apart” option last week which makes windows explode into tiny bits when you close them. Never had so few lingering windows open in my life.

I swear we must have started posting at the same time, but adding an alt text to the image cost me 2 minutes apparently. xD

https://xkcd.com/1205/

Give Ubuntu Studio a try maybe? It comes with a lot of audio production stuff preinstalled and preconfigured, one of the most important ones in this context being low-latency process scheduling.

Essentially most distros just have default process scheduling options, which means a process might be starved for CPU time, theoretically for up to 2s or so at a time, which is very bad if that process is generating or consuming an audio stream. Low-latency scheduling, while not entirely preventing it from happening, should significantly reduce this.

You could also just configure most other distros Kernels to do low-latency scheduling of course. Or if you don’t want to muck about with kernel settings try Ubuntu Studio, which has that and more all ready to use.

Well that one is pretty obvious isn’t it? Consoles and the like have a single target hardware, or very few at least, so their testing is way more reliable. Meanwhile a random PC will have one of several hundred chip designs, implemented by a few dozen different vendors, ranging over decades. Development for and testing under such conditions is just way more complicated, so all devs can really do is aiming for #worksonmymachine and hope for detailed bug reports and feedback when others have issues.

Yeah the law is indeed quite complex, with a lot of caveats and cross-references. One important bit is the continuation of your second quote:

wenn sie die Bundesrepublik Deutschland länger als drei Monate verlassen wollen, ohne dass die Voraussetzungen des § 1 Absatz 2 bereits vorliegen.

And §1 (2) says:

(2) Die Wehrpflicht ruht, solange Wehrpflichtige ihren ständigen Aufenthalt und ihre Lebensgrundlage außerhalb der Bundesrepublik Deutschland haben, wenn Tatsachen die Annahme rechtfertigen, dass sie beabsichtigen, ihren ständigen Aufenthalt im Ausland beizubehalten.

If you have already lived outside of Germany more than three months than that is a “fact that justifies the assumption” that you will continue to do so.

One person argued that a headline clarified that it is for people with duties. It’s possible but I am not sure.

If by duties you mean being under “Wehrpflicht”, that’s just any male 17-45 (during peace) that hasn’t been exempted. If you mean “Wehrdienst”, then no, the paragraph is explicitly about Wehrpflicht. This is intended to keep track of anybody that could be recruited in case of war.

Worth noting here that this article of the constitution already had to be changed once because the European human rights court ruled that treating men and women differently isn’t allowed. The case wasn’t about the stipulation that only men need to serve but about one explicitly preventing women from doing so, and thus Article 12a (1) remained intact; But it stands to reason that it would be struck down if somebody brings the case before the courts, especially since there is precedent now.

Since it’s April, all expats have failed to apply for a permission.

This is incorrect from what I can tell, the law provides an exception for people who have already reported the abandonment of their permanent residence in Germany (which was already required by another law, Bundesmeldegesetz § 17 (2)).