That law has existed since 1951 and is based on an executive order from 1931 by Hindenburg.

Because even when you encrypt the foreign third party can still lock you out of your data by simply switching off the servers.

The name is "Regulation to Prevent and Combat Child Sexual Abuse".

"Chat Control" is not an official term, but a name chosen by critics of the law.

wonder if opposition should first fight for an addendum to correct the title in all those double speak laws, and then fight to curb it.

Buypass was one of the free alternatives to Let's Encrypt that also supported the ACME protocol and even gave you 180 days validity.

Indeed, I had just started using them at that. No account needed, you just needed to set your contact to "mailto:$EMAIL" and get on with your day. Was nice to use them for a few domains so as to make sure I had a more diverse set of tried and tested issuers, with bonus points to Buypass for being outside the US as well (Norway).

It doesn't really "find" any personal sites, you have to tell it about each manually with a pull request: https://github.com/MarginaliaSearch/submit-site-to-marginali...

This isn't true, Marginalia Search has a crawler. The guy who runs the site writes a lot about the trials and tribulations of running a web crawler on his blog if you're interested. https://www.marginalia.nu/log/ I just checked and my site is listed despite me never manually submitting it. I guess if nobody links to your site, you would have to manually submit it due to it not showing up in crawls, but that's true about any search engine.

That form is just to insert domains that aren't found automatically.

Germany isn't ramping up gas imports, it's replacing both nuclear and coal with renewables.

And even though gas power plants are the designated backup power plants for times when there is neither enough sun nor wind, this doesn't actually happen often enough that you need even more gas. So gas consumtion in Germany is actually projected to decline by at least 50% until 2040 [0].

[0] https://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/energie-nachfrage-nach-gas...

>And even though gas power plants are the designated backup power plants for times when there is neither enough sun nor wind,

Doesen't that mean that they need to build the capacity to cover their full use regardless(expensive), just that less fuel(cheap) is burned?

No, unless you're anticipating that winds will drop to 0 not just across entire Germany, but across the EU.

What kind of capacity can Germany rely on to receive from other countries when it's own production is zero? Someone has to have reliable capacity somewhere, usually basic infrastructure such as electricity is built on guarantees, unless Germany has decided it's okay to get blackouts when it's not windy and neighboring countries would rather use their power themselves

There are no guarantees in life, only probabilities. People much smarter than us can determine how much spare capacity the EU needs from non-intermittent sources to make electric blackouts a 500-year event, just like they do with building standards related to earthquakes.

I don't know what the number is, but it's probably greater than 0 and definitely less than the total peak EU demand, and if I had to guess I would say it's probably closer to 20%.

It was 52!, the number of possible permutations of 52 cards: https://czep.net/weblog/52cards.html

Food security is not an issue at all. For example in Germany around 20% of all farmland is used for "energy plants" (biogas etc.). Even in Germany solar planels have around a 28 times higher efficiency per area than biogas plants, so there is a lot of potential to repurpose farm land without changing food production at all.

>there is a lot of potential to repurpose farm land without changing food production at all

This takes years, which isn't enough in the case of a major food security event, i.e. war.

You link to table level locks which are different from advisory locks: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/explicit-locking.htm...

Are you sure that you're talking about the same locks? What are the pitfalls exactly?

PostgreSQL has pg_advisory_xact_lock which releases the lock automatically when the transaction is over.

But then you’d be holding a DB connection for the entire duration of your task (which may include HTTP calls, etc). You might even do asynchronous work in parallel, which doesn’t quite work with txn locks. So the session based locks seem a bit better imo.

I personally do these in .NET, I obtain a connection dedicated to that operation, start a transaction, obtain lock and go crazy. Upon completion of the async workflow, the transaction closes and lock releases. I know I'm holding up a connection and putting some pressure on postgres by keeping a transaction open but session management might be harder as the underlying connection provider uses pooling and it is easier to use transactions rather than sessions here.

And if you add something like pgBouncer or whatever, this should still work but a session lock would fuck things up.