For largest absolute net gain of land area, I guess Mongolia wins the cake, getting a very large slice of Siberia while losing almost no land. For a percentage net gain of land area, maybe one of the European microstates, or East Timor.
Largest absolute net loss of land area is Russia for sure. Largest percent loss is... probably Russia? Again, losing Siberia is a large fraction of its land, and nobody else seems to be so screwed by the distance.
Excluding overseas territories, there's three borders between Yakutia-cum-Japan and its current capital, Moscow, and another case of that in the far western reaches of Brazil. If you include overseas territories, well, French Polynesia is currently almost literally antipodal from Paris, and I don't really know how you would count 'most countries away' in that case, but you can't really get further than that.
Not all components rise in cost at the same time. Overall, prices have roughly doubled since the early 2000's--things that I expect to cost, say, $10 would now cost around $20. However, some things have risen in cost much more quickly: housing prices, for one.
The things you are talking about are a phenomenon largely of the COVID era and later. The biggest wage gains post-COVID have been in the lowest end of the job market, and services where almost-minimum-wage labor is a high fraction of their cost have commensurately risen in price the fastest (e.g., fast food). Similarly, a lot of the easy money flowing into unprofitable grow-then-make-money businesses (like delivery firms) have stopped flowing in, so those services have had to actually make money from customers, which causes their costs to rise.
Randall estimates in the alt-text of https://xkcd.com/1279/ that there's about ¾ of a million people who just use somebody else's email on gmail without realizing it's not their email address.
I chuck IP address literals (both IPv4 and IPv6) on the list of things that you should care about for email if you're writing an MTA or an MUA but should otherwise generally not care about supporting if you're using email for something else (e.g., as a UID for login).
How would they do that? The ACME protocol is "take the basic artifacts you use for certificate signing, wrap them in JSON (cryptographically, using standard JWS), then send them over using HTTP + TLS." Every part of that is something for which there exists a buttload of implementations in whatever language you care to use.
> Those methods include covert measures to ensure NSA control over setting of international encryption standards, the use of supercomputers to break encryption with "brute force",
Things that definitely don't happen. Those same encryption standards are used by the US military, and the international cryptography community can pretty readily rule out keyed backdoors.
The thought that supercomputers could break Internet encryption by brute force is laughable. One would have to be innumerate to think such a thing.
Jacobin has a reputation of being in the category of affirm-your-biases news media, albeit one that is left-leaning. Something strong enough that you'd have a prior that any Jacobin article is going to blame all of society's ills on capitalism, and since it's strongly baked into the priors of its readers, there's going to be no real investigation after blaming capitalism.
Which this article basically does, at first glance. It assumes capitalism is bad for baby-rearing, doesn't really motivate why, and instead just goes East Germany had a higher birth rate than West Germany before reunification, then after reunification, it flipped, therefore capitalism causes low birth rates.
I’ll respond to you but thanks for everyone who responded - I appreciate the perspective especially the call out to the Jacobians group from the other poster.
Honestly - it’s hard to find a publication that isn’t biased, or in many cases just outright wrong outside of a narrow subject matter and are ignorantly pushing someone’s propaganda because they don’t know better. The Atlantic, Economist are posted often and come to mind. I’m exaggerating slightly I’m sure Jacobian has a reason for being disdained.
How do you define bias? I feel like many publications are
"biased" towards Austrian economics despite little evidence for their benefit, and many examples of it's proponents driving their homelands into the ground.
Should I declare everyone who says positive things about libertarianism as "biased" and discount their points?
It is a little rich to simultaneously complain that the article is too long, that it didn't go into enough detail, and that it didn't support your pet theory. Maybe if you'd read the article, you'd find out that not only does the author discuss money as a motivating factor as the first example (precisely because it is popularly hold to be the main motivating factor) but then immediately explain why it was the least important motivating factor for pre-modern societies.
It's also worth mentioning that directly linked from this blog post are several in-depth examinations of historical military systems, including Mongol, broader steppe nomad (note that the Mongols were exceptional), Roman, Carthaginian, Macedonian, Greek, and Gallic specifically covered in depth, and a couple of other cases (e.g., Medieval Europe and Mamluk examples) more covered in passing. The detail you think is lacking can easily be found in those blog posts.
You can also find a nice summary of the different motivating factors at the end, with 21 specific examples distributed among them. Is that not enough for you?
Calling that elegant is a path dependence of the history of fork+exec.
In an alternative world where fork+exec never existed, a lot of those "usual APIs" would probably have had an explicit pid argument to them that let you modify process configuration from a different process. (This is how Fuschia works, e.g.). There's a lot of benefit to this world: the most obvious is that you don't have to magic up some IPC system just to report configuration errors, but there's actually a good amount of utility in being able to have a manager process that is tweaking attributes of its children (e.g., debuggers would love it).
Or you could call ptrace_syscall (that doesn't currently exist) on your child processes that you are tracing because you'd always be tracing them by default, or get an io_uring for the child process, or...
The value is not needing to change every other syscall and not needing to write new ones with a pid argument (besides which, what when you want to change it to a pidfd argument? then you add pidfd_syscall instead of duplicating every syscall again)
Hell, after the 'competition' was announced, many commentators observed that it was pretty much written with Arlington, VA in mind, and the competition was less a serious competition and more a ploy to try to get a lot of subsidies for what their plans already were. It's also worth noting that the bids that were accepted (Arlington and New York) were some of the most miserly bids.
For largest absolute net gain of land area, I guess Mongolia wins the cake, getting a very large slice of Siberia while losing almost no land. For a percentage net gain of land area, maybe one of the European microstates, or East Timor.
Largest absolute net loss of land area is Russia for sure. Largest percent loss is... probably Russia? Again, losing Siberia is a large fraction of its land, and nobody else seems to be so screwed by the distance.
Excluding overseas territories, there's three borders between Yakutia-cum-Japan and its current capital, Moscow, and another case of that in the far western reaches of Brazil. If you include overseas territories, well, French Polynesia is currently almost literally antipodal from Paris, and I don't really know how you would count 'most countries away' in that case, but you can't really get further than that.
reply