The often mentioned “silent majority” are actually latent fascists who were previously apathetic.

You saw the silent majority on the streets when that “remigration” talk leaked out of closed AfD circles: The streets were literally not big enough to contain them. 70% oppose any other party going in coalition with them (unsurprisingly, the rest are AfD, BSW, or FDP voters), about half want to see them banned, which is a question more nuanced than “I want them gone”.

I guess that after a ban, the BSW could gobble up most of that support for them. And while Wagenknecht is a clown and at least veering towards Nazbol she’s far less of a danger to democracy.

Solve anxiety. The hatred, the desire to put down others, all that is caused by anxiety short-circuiting people’s minds, acting on, put very hand-wavily, reptilian instead of higher mammalian instincts, including social ones¹. Without underlying anxieties fascism has nothing to latch onto, and nothing to make even worse so it can propagate and perpetuate itself.

Key anxieties to address nowadays, and feel free to add your own, are economical security, “will I be poor in the future”, as well as social alienation, “can people be trusted”. Both require overcoming neoliberalism. Also, yes, solve anxieties regarding the future of the planet but that’s more about saving the planet so we may continue to live on it than anti-fascism for the simple reason that eco-fascism is overall negligible as a political force.

How? First of all, stop acting from anxiety.

¹ Is that where the “lizard people” thing comes from?

If anything, more potent weed is less harmful because you are putting a smaller amount of burned plant material into your lungs to get the same effect.

Yes. The actual issue is the THC/CBD ratio, CBD being antipsychotic as well as blocking the metabolisation of THC into more psychoactive variants.

Add to that criminalisation and the desire of dealers to impress clueless customers with head highs and you get selective breeding for high-THC strains. I’d say the main reason I stopped back in the days was because there was essentially nothing but white willow on the market, ~20% THC ~1% CBD. And that’s not even the worst of the strains.

Hopefully legalisation cuts back on that BS, with every satchel coming with test results showing people how off-kilter or balanced the weed is. There’s certainly no shortage of CBD-heavy seeds available, the market is obviously there.

The Chinese are making a lot of noise about Taiwan and that’s why Taiwan is the last place you should be looking at. Look at Outer Manchuria, instead, especially in the face of Russian weakness and looming chaos.

They tried that before, the Verfassungsschutz will say, publicly, something along the lines of “Two of these 500 quotes are from our moles”. That way they protect their sources, vanishing in the general soup, while the court can see that it’s party sentiment, not something injected into the party by the Verfassungsschutz. Judges will be able to see the whole uncensored thing one way or the other though it might not necessarily the judges actually judging the case: There’s special in camera senates in high courts for when some agency really doesn’t want to show stuff. They can look at absolutely anything, and all they have to judge is “yep, it was indeed 2 of 500 quotes”.

The article, most of all, misses that it’s about CBD to THC ratio, not raw overall cannabinoid content. CBD is an antipsychotic and on the cusp of getting the stamp of approval for treating schizophrenia. Strains on the street, in the meantime, have been bred for THC at the expense of CBD because it’s THC which gives a head-high, makes consumers believe they got strong stuff.

The deeper question, overall, is why we live in a society which prompts people to take anxiolytics to cope.

I very much doubt Germany could grant Netanyahu immunity from arrest without withdrawing from the ICC, which is not going to happen. Just because Merz says he’d like to do something doesn’t mean it’s going to happen, he’s running his mouth all the time.

Nah there’s also plenty of mismanagement, in particular spending the cold war being a one product economy and thinking that the USSR will be around forever, overpaying for sugar and sending industrial goods in return.

Venezuela messing up royally and not being able to subsidise Cuba with their oil any more is a more recent problem, but pretty much the same pattern.

Cubans are masters of improvisation and the party is smart enough not to interfere with the people’s capacity to self-organise to get around acute problems, unlike Americans and Russians they don’t micro-manage for the sake of micro-managing, but they’re very much not masters of strategic planning.

Over long, better short, Cuba has to increase its value-add and labour productivity. Export fewer resources, more and most of all more high-value finished products, also become energy independent. It’s nice that they can help out Venezuela with toilet paper but truth be told it’s not really a product that’s highly sought after on the world market because by and large, countries are better at not fucking up their economy than Venezuela.

Or, differently put: Wake me when Cuba exports electric buses. That, preferably, look weirdly like 40s, 50s American cars, in a retrofuturistic way. Or something more niche, but have something that’s not rum, tobacco, or honey. Oh, pharmaceuticals, gotta give them that.

and to do that, we need to fight disinformation and far-right propaganda on social media.

Nope. I mean it’s not wrong to do that, but it would be mistaken to see that as anything but a flanking measure: You can’t fight affect with cognition. We need real-world policy which alleviates people’s anxieties.

A hypothetical Maltese jet could take care of it, yes.

Malta isn’t part of NATO but I’d guess they have an air policing deal with Italy in one way or the other.

It wasn’t necessary for previous cases: The SRP (NSDAP successor) and KPD (run by the KGB, laid siege to parliament) had no political hand-wringing attached to them, legally they were also pretty much open and shut cases. Banning the NPD was never politically contentious, but needed some work for the legal part so it took a while for proceedings to be opened.

That is: It’s not necessarily a long and arduous process.

The reason it’s such a slog with the AfD is because it didn’t start out as a Nazi party – it slowly, over multiple internal putsches, turned into one. It got normalised, simply by people becoming accustomed to its presence, at about the same speed at which it radicalised. Had it started out with the programme it has now it would have long since been banhammered.

Oh, well, add piracy to the list.

If the support was for Jewish safety or the safety of Israel as a state they would work for it to return into its 1967 borders and start making ammends to all the people they wronged.

That’s pretty much the German position: The annexations and settlements outside of 1967 Israel are illegal.

Jews that are dissenting the German state ideology get repressed in Germany.

It’s more complicated than that because those people aren’t dissenting from the German position, see the link above. They’re just being way more blunt about it. More correct would be “Jews who are dissenting from whatever the Jüdische Allgemeine writes”, i.e. Zionist apologia. I think the technical term for the political situation is “clusterfuck”.

It’s a pickle. The unwavering support is for Israel and its existence, not for the fascist regime or the genocide. Germany sent multiple sternly worded letters regarding the latter.

Politically, yes. When it comes to law, no. It’s certainly convenient to have a 1000 page report to file as evidence but as far as opening proceedings is concerned the only requirement is that you’re the government, have a majority in parliament, or a majority among states.

The applicable law is Article 21 GG:

1. Political parties shall participate in the formation of the political will of the people. They may be freely established. Their internal organisation must conform to democratic principles. They must publicly account for their assets and for the sources and use of their funds.

2. Parties that, by reason of their aims or the behaviour of their adherents, seek to undermine or abolish the free democratic basic order or to endanger the existence of the Federal Republic of Germany shall be unconstitutional.

3. Parties that, by reason of their aims or the behaviour of their adherents, are oriented towards an undermining or abolition of the free democratic basic order or an endangerment of the existence of the Federal Republic of Germany shall be excluded from state financing. If such exclusion is determined, any favourable fiscal treatment of these parties and of payments made to those parties shall cease.

4. The Federal Constitutional Court shall rule on the question of unconstitutionality within the meaning of paragraph (2) of this Article and on exclusion from state financing within the meaning of paragraph (3).

5. Details shall be regulated by federal laws.

Key point here is “seek to undermine or abolish the free and democratic basic order”, quoth the BVerfG:

The free democratic basic order can be defined as an order which excludes any form of tyranny or arbitrariness and represents a governmental system under a rule of law, based upon self-determination of the people as expressed by the will of the existing majority and upon freedom and equality. The fundamental principles of this order include at least: respect for the human rights given concrete form in the Basic Law, in particular for the right of a person to life and free development; popular sovereignty; separation of powers; responsibility of government; lawfulness of administration; independence of the judiciary; the multi-party principle; and equality of opportunities for all political parties.

It’s their own definition so push come to shove they’re going to add to it. Overall though the lines aren’t new and haven’t shifted, that’s a quote from a judgement from 1952.

Paragraph 3 is new, that has been introduced after banning the NPD (now “Die Heimat”) failed not because they would not be opposed to the free and democratic order, but because they were judged to be too impotent to do anything about it. Previously banned parties include the NSDAP, not under this law but by the allies, then the SRP as it was a successor of the NSDAP, and then the KPD not for being communist but for being run by the KGB and laying siege to parliament. Bans of the FAP and NL failed because the BVerfG said they’re not parties so they were banned as associations, instead. Last case is the NPD, the first attempt failed because the state had so many moles inside that the court saw itself unable to distinguish between state and party actions, the second as already said because they’re yes, hateful assclowns, but also pathetic. They’ve been excluded from state funds for six years, the case will have to be judged anew in 2030.

A crawler is a data processing machine, nothing more. therefor you are disrupting dataprocessing through data. If you think its not thats ok too.

Nah it’s definitely disrupting data processing, even though at a very low-key level – you’re not causing any data to become invalid or such. It’s the intent to harm the operator that’s the linchpin: “Jemandem einen Nachteil zufügen”. “Jemand” needs to be a person, natural or legal. And by stopping a crawler you don’t want to inflict a disadvantage on the operator you want to, at most, stop them from gaining an advantage. “Inflict disadvantage” and “prevent advantage” are two different things.

I would still advise to contact your lawyer in germany if you are thinking about hosting a zipbomb

Good idea, but as already said before: First, you should contact a sysadmin. Who will tell you it’s a stupid idea.

The intent is to get rid of crawlers which are disrupting the operation of your servers. That’s not intent of doing harm to the crawler’s operator, or their business. It’s analogous to telling a hawker to fuck off: Polite, no, but them being able to profit off you is not your responsibly, you do not have to accede to that. And intent to harm the ISP is even less reasonable to assume.

cant find the primary source anymore https://netzpolitik.org/2012/berec-studie-dpi-bei-vielen-providern-bereits-im-einsatz/

That’s out of date anyway. How about this one. DPI is limited to OSI level 5 and only allowed to resolve network issues – and a crawler crashing is not a network issue.

Countering Animator with Blender, that’s brutal. For at least some stuff Blender is also the better Illustrator.

Casting concrete requires building formwork to cast the concrete into. For any standardised shape constructing the formwork is easy: Just assemble it from the parts you have. Straight sections? The most common case. Rounded corners? As long as you’re fine with “should be round” and don’t require some very specific radius, those are probably also at hand. A gargoyle? Well that’s not an easy form to produce but once you have it, you can cast 1000 gargoyles.

Where 3d printing comes in is places where you have a shape that’s literally or nearly unique, where building the formwork would be a PITA. In all other cases, the traditional method is quicker and cheaper.

Also interesting is stuff like solar sintering plain sand.