>The ICC can literally order the arrest of the workforce of an entire bank if it participates in anything having to do with retaliation against the ICC.
I would suggest that the reason that the ICC hasn't done this yet is not deference, but because they don't want to have to force a bank to choose between having their business essentially destroyed by being sanctioned by the US, and being arrested by the court.
The fix is turning the detection of the modified ram from a boot failure into a warning and log output, then tell users asking for support that they don't have support for Pis that were modified by third parties.
Instead we get restrictions on all users because some users buy stuff from random marketplaces online?
I don't know why you're suggesting the fix is that they offer support for 3rd modded RAM.
The Iran war has points, namely preventing a dedicated American enemy from getting nuclear weapons, contributing to Trump's legacy, and probably something to do with Israel.
The problem is that it can't be won with current USA capabilities and everyone not in MAGA already knew this yet Trump started it anyway.
The Ukrainians even offered drone defences before it started and were publically rebuffed by Trump. The ignorance and hubris of the Trump administration is truly remarkable.
The JCPOA was effectively theatre, and I'm genuinely surprised to see someone defending it. Most notably, it restricted where the International Atomic Energy Agency could inspect. For example, Iran had broad remit to deny entry to military installations in part or whole. Further, even when the IAEA suspected enrichment at an undeclared site, it could take up to 24 days to receive permission to inspect. Even then, Iran guided inspectors to pre-approved sections of the sites.
Further, the agreement allowed Iran to develop more advanced centrifuges. The kind which could be used to enrich uranium to weapons grade.
Further, the agreement left substantial nuclear infrastructure and expertise intact. For example, Fordow was not dismantled and 1,044 IR-1 centrifuges remained there. Natanz also retained thousands of operating centrifuges.
In 2025, the IAEA concluded that Iran had failed to declare nuclear material and nuclear-related activities at Lavisan-Shian, Varamin, and Turquzabad, and could not determine the whereabouts of some nuclear material.
The JCPOA allowed Iran to significantly expand its military capabilities and strengthen the regime via economic sanction relief, the release of hundreds of billions of dollars of Iranian international assets, and normalisation of trade (most notably oil). Iran used this opportunity to consolidate power without any material commitment or action towards sustainable cessation of nuclear weapons research and capability.
One could argue that it was the best of all bad options on the table, but let us not pretend it was a good option. Iran has been funding death and terrorism all over the world for decades. Its stated goal is the annihilation of many Western nations. The treatment of its own people is beyond comprehension and description. It routinely practises the rape of virgin women before execution (for things like not dressing modestly, or protesting), so that these young women will end up in hell. If the world were just, the entire world would unite to invade Iran, remove the dictator class from power, and implement democracy.
Just to be crystal clear: none of what I have written states nor implies that Trump has handled this conflict well.
Preventing a dedicated American enemy to get nukes, an enemy of which the American intelligence agencies said there is currently no sign they work to get nukes and with which you had deals to prevent them from doing so.
Sorry, but all you did was:
1. Showed them and the world that treaties with you are worth nothing
2. Showed them and the world, to gain the respect of the US, you need nukes. Decades of loyalty, treaties or good partner have been shown to be worth nothing, while being an authoritarian dictatorship and having nukes are respected.
3. Showed them and the world that having US bases on your soil is a liability and not a protection.
All in all if you were US president and your task was to destroy the US' standing in the world, there is not much more you could have done.
If, in reflection, I may contribute to that effort, 'the point' of something is much more about its goals than something 'being pointless' which is more about outcomes. Which is interesting since you would assume they would align in meaning more having the same base word.
When a person says something is pointless they either mean there was actually no significant intent behind it OR a judgement that the intent/plan/achievability behind whatever point there is, is of such low quality that there might as well not have been any intent behind it at all.
Trying to keep yourself dry with a newspaper over your head in a hurricane: pointless.
IIRC it was the people from Pakistan that did 9/11, now these people have nuclear weapons. Iranians didn’t do any 9/11 in USA but somehow they are not allowed nuclear weapons? How is this supposed to make sense?
This article certainly did not improve my perception of Glenn Greenwald. Unprofessional, wild narratives in his reporting, and a changing story about why the Intercept fired their research division in charge of the files.
If you want an industry to act in a certain way you legislate for it, not wag fingers at consumers buying things. "If you want cheaper consumer devices we all need to individually stop using AI" is not useful or realistic.
I would suggest that the reason that the ICC hasn't done this yet is not deference, but because they don't want to have to force a bank to choose between having their business essentially destroyed by being sanctioned by the US, and being arrested by the court.
reply