Simple workaround: Stamp “not chlorinated” on the non-US stuff.

Much more useful to not actually do anything so they can keep bringing it up whenever a distraction is needed.

I would not recommend mate or any derivative of it to someone who explicitly asked for something caffeine free.

How that happened in the first place is anybody’s guess

It’s a cult. Always has been.

I am not wasting any more time by digging out statistics about any of this stuff. Since you apparently on purpose ignore the blatantly obvious part where 2 other major parties actively voted with AfD for exactly what they want on migration I don’t think any amount of sources or data could convince you anyway.

CDU/CSU and FDP pushed for exactly what AfD wants on migration in parliament and voted with them a few weeks ago.

Chancellor Scholz (SPD) is pushing a tougher stance on deportation.

We have border controls to tackle illegal immigration again, decided by interior minister Nancy Faeser (SPD).

The Green Party has internal struggles because the youth organization wants the party leadership to stop going along with the aggressive tightening of migration policy.

One of the big reasons BSW split off from the Left was because they wanted a more aggressive stance against migration, completely in line with AfD.

To summarize:

AfD wants Nazi shit.

CDU/CSU, FDP and BSW are copying them on the topic, including demanding things that are obvious violations of European law and our constitution.

SPD is steering in that direction as far as possible without obviously breaking European law and our constitution.

The Greens are begrudgingly going along with it.

Among all the relevant parties here only the Left have a clear stance against all this madness.

In the mid 1990’s

• no matter what a husband did to his wife, it would never be considered rape by German law. (The guy who will most likely be our next head of government voted against the change back in 1997.)

• violent xenophobic riots took place in Germany, and the government kind of just shrugged and did nothing.

• same-sex marriages were not a thing anywhere in Europe.

• racist, sexist and homophobic jokes were socially acceptable even in relatively progressive circles.

• transgender people even existing was still a taboo. Giving them any rights was completely unthinkable.

Super-condensed version: Based on current polls we are almost guaranteed to see the next government shift to the right hard compared to the current one. And the guy most likely to lead it could be described as “Trump light”. I am very worried it will get even worse 4 years later.

Slightly longer version:

CDU looks like it will be the winner of the election, but not big enough to form a government without a coalition partner. They used to be considered center-right, but have been shifting more towards the right for a few years now (since Friedrich Merz - “Trump light” - took over as their leader). So the very best one could hope for with them in power would be an overall center-ish government.

Possible partners:

• SPD - historically center left, with a long lasting tradition to be easily pushed over on basically all their principles in coalition governments, especially towards the right

• The Greens - historically slightly left of SPD with more focus on environmental topics. Drifting more towards being SPD 2.0 in recent times. Even they recently had some relevant figures try to gain favor with voters by blaming things on immigrants and demanding a stronger stance against them. Least horrible option, but will lose ground among their own followers if they enter a coalition with CDU, worsening chances to get something less horrible next time.

• AfD - literal Nazis, and I mean literal in the original sense without any exaggeration. CDU used to have a strong stance against working with them, but that has been weakened over time. And a few months ago the leader of CDU started spreading the blatant lie that that was never a thing, despite all the evidence to the contrary.

Silver lining:

The party of selfish libertarian assholes (FDP) will most likely not make it into the next parliament after very blatantly sabotaging the current government from within for several years.

Germany will never do anything about Israel

True.

because they would hate to stop another country doing a genocide.

In the 1990s Germany sent troops to Serbia to stop a genocide. That was the first German military mission on foreign soil after WW2 (excluding missions where the German military just provided disaster relief on foreign soil).

Germany decided a long time ago that supporting Israel to a near-unconditional degree is part of the state interest of Germany, as penance for the holocaust. No politician smart and ambitious enough to get into a position of power would dare challenge that, because it carries a big risk of being branded as antisemitic without any serious potential political gain.

Edit: Mods, should I delete this because it quotes what was probably the reason for deleting the post I answered to?

Piracy is an act of robbery or criminal violence by ship or boat-borne attackers upon another ship or a coastal area, typically with the goal of stealing cargo and other valuable goods.

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

What nearly half of Young Norwegians are fine with is not piracy. It is unlicensed consumption of copyrighted media. There is a difference, and we should stop blurring the lines.

Francis used his only Mass in Belgium to publicly demand that priests who abuse young people be punished, and that the church hierarchy stop covering up their crimes.

“Someone in that organization really needs to do something about this problem” says the literal leader of that same organization, who has unlimited authoritarian rule over everything that happens there.

Less than half a year ago

Car manufacturers […] have issued an urgent warning against revoking the EU’s 2035 de facto ban on the sale of new petrol and diesel cars

specifically that was from

the Platform for Electromobility, which counts members such as Renault Group, Uber, Volvo, Ford and Tesla

https://www.euractiv.com/section/electricity/news/car-industry-warns-eu-leaders-against-reversing-2035-combustion-engine-ban/

RustyRooster: C is the root of all modern languages

FORTRAN: Am I a joke to you?

https://www.cato.org/commentary/elon-musk-sues-critics-silence-so-much-free-speech#

A typical project manager will get a range, take the lower bound and communicate it as the only relevant number to every other stakeholder. When that inevitably does not work out, all the blame will be passed on to you unfiltered.

Depending on where you work it may or may not be worth giving someone new the benefit of the doubt, but in general it is safer to only ever talk about the upper bound and add some padding.

Nothing described in that article even remotely resembles a war. The title is pure, shameless clickbait.

But is it USB-IF’s fault manufacturers tried […]

Yes, it absolutely is USB-IF’s fault that they are not even trying to enforce some semblance of consistency and sanity among adopters. They do have the power to say “no soup certification for you” to manufacturers not following the rules, but they don’t use it anywhere near aggressively enough. And that includes not making rules that are strict enough in the first place.

They are not bad at this. You are bad at understanding it.

I work with this stuff, and I do understand it. Some of my colleagues are actively participating in USB-IF workgroups, although not the ones responsible for naming end user facing things. They come to me for advice when those other workgroups changed some names retroactively again and we need to make sure we are still backwards compatible with things that rely on those names and that we are not confusing our customers more than necessary.

That is why I am very confident in claiming those naming schemes are bad.

“don’t even bother learning it” is my advice for normal end users, and I do stand by it.

But the names are not hard if you bother to learn them.

Never said it is hard.

It is more complex than it needs to be.

It is internally inconsistent.

Names get changed retroactively with new spec releases.

None of that is hard to learn, just not worth the effort.

Sorry, didn’t want this to look like an attack or disagreement. Just wanted to highlight that point, because arbitrary maximum sizes for passwords are a pet peeve of mine.

At least the character limit had a technical reason behind it: having a set size for fields means your database can be more efficient.

If that is the actual technical reason behind it, that is a huge red flag. When you hash a password, the hash is a fixed size. The size of the original password does not matter, because it should not be stored anyway.