That is just its core function doing its thing transforming inputs to outputs based on learned pattern matching.

It may not have been trained on translation explicitly, but it very much has been trained on these are matching stuff via its training material. Since you know what its training set most likely contained..... dictionaries. Which is as good as asking it to learn translation. Another stuff most likely in training data: language course books, with matching translated sentences in them. Again well you didnt explicitly tell it to learn to translate, but in practice the training data selection did it for you.

Also how are his bitter water abortion potion brewing skills?

But the thing is Democrats could change their strategy. Since frankly (I don't know why, seems stupid given how small and hard to catch segment it is) Democrat strategy is to chase the middle of "moderate Republicans and fence sitters".

When I would hazard a guess, if they instead adopted are strategy of exactly focusing on non-voters with democrat leaning would bring them lot of votes.

In general blaming the voter is a bad idea. It is way easier for party to qdapt to voter sentiments with their strategy, than it is for a party to change the emotional and mental state of millions of voters. In this case it is really the customer aka the voter is always right. If one can't convince voter to vote, it is the candidates fault. To play otherwise is to say millions of people ought to adapt to single or couple persons whims. It shouldn't be that way and in general it isn't that way.

Since in practice, if person is apathetic they won't vote. No amount of "but that is stupid of you" will fix it. Apathy is emotional matter, not matter of logic. As much as some consultant might try to assume humans are rational, no they aren't. Humans are inherently emotional beings and party wanting to succeed must adapt to that.

Only way out of apathy isn't fear, it just makes apathy deeper. The way out is hope, promise of prosperity and then delivering on that promise. Since to not do so is to cause betrayed expectations and doubly deep apathy.

Government has to pass vote of confidence to form. PiS and its allies even combined don't have the numbers per preliminary estimates. Where as estimate is the main opposition and their supporting coalition of parties will have the numbers.

There is no way opposition is going to do the incumbent government the favor of refraining from voting down the PiS attempt to form government. If PiS and their one likely partner party try to form government, estimate is, attempt will crash and burn by geting voted no confidence by Parliament.

This is how things go in multiparty democracies and coalition governments. It doesn't matter who has plurality. What matters is "can you pass the government forming vote of confidence". Prime minister could be from the smallest party in Parliament as long as he can gather Parliament's confidence.

Edit: minority governments do happen in multiparty Parliaments, buy those happen at the leave of the Parliament. Meaning the minority is allowed to pass confidence. Either by directly getting support votes or depending voting system by parties voting empty. Some countries confidence votes is "there is confidence, unless majority actively votes yes on no confidence proposal". Making voting empty a tacit not enthusiastic signal of confidence. "We won't actively vote for you, but we won't either vote you down". Leaving government standing.

Minority government can not form against active resistance of majority of Parliament.

Well PESCO did get created. Denmark dropped their opt out from CSDP. Stuff like this moves slowly, specially upon there not being single hegemonic leader saying "We do this" and everyone else answering "Yes boss". EU is herding catch and it makes everything move slowly.

Oh no, unions wanting to expand the sectors industry they cover? How suprising. 😃

SO if Russia starts lobbing around chemical and biological weapons, then Ukraine should do that too? Like not gonna work like that, for example biological weapons are one of those were you can't just go "tit-for-tat". Since every biological weapon used is new risk of launching a pandemic on the world and so on.

To certain level, yes if other side breakes the rules, we get to break them also. However there is a line. Line which you never cross. Under no circumstances should Ukraine be allowed to target medical facilities, even on Russia having done it multitude of times. Indiscriminate intentional bombardment of still habited cities with no allowing of civilians to evacuate should always be off the table. You just don't do that. All it leads is to needless human suffering.

It's one thing to aim for military or strategic target and miss and hit civilians. That is recognized as reality of war. Terror bombardment? Never to be allowed. Not to mention it doesn't work. Every example in history has shown all it does is make the receiving end angry, instead of demoralizing them. It sets a "So it's to the last breath then? That is the name of the game, fine that is the name of the game" and they fight to bitter end.

That is refrigerant dependent. For example R744 (plain old CO2) works well efficiently down to -4F, -20C and down to -40C/-40F just with some efficiency drop.

Main issue is CO2 needs a constant high pressure heat pump system, since it needs to be highly pressurised to be fluid at all. In ambient it sublimates (goes straight between gas and solid aka dry ice).

However that is a solved issue. Working CO2 heatpumps are off the self commercially available these days. Just still little more expensive as I understand. However prices should come down with production economies of scale, upon CO2 taking over due to pollution, toxicity, flammability, green house considerations. He nastier chemicals weren't used for being all the ways superior, but due to it being easier to make the heat pump units (be they running in heating or in cooling) due to lower pressure requirements.

Since CO2 and ammonia were the original refrigerants. Used in large ice production facilities early on, where their specific needs weren't issue even for earlier technology. Large, purpose built, stationary industrial facility had no problem accommodating the needed massive pressures by just really massive and heavy pipework.

However these days the propeller head people developed micro channel tubing and heat exchangers to keep the high pressure CO2 in control.

Recall, an official recall, is a safety issue notice really. Its a legally defined thing in motor vehicle code. If manufacturer finds a defect, issue or feature affecting driving safety they have to notify safety authorities and get a recall issued. It doesn't have to have anything to do with, whether the product goes back to service garage or not.

Important point: Not every Tesla OTA update triggers a NHTSA (or other national road safety agency) official recall. Tesla has updated their cars plenty without recall notice. Only safety related issues get recall issued along with the OTA update.

Thus it is meaningfully, that they have so many software related (and thus OTA fixed) safety recalls. Each of those times is Hey, NHTSA, gonna have to admit, our software has a safety oopsie on it. Here is the paperwork, could you please issue us the official recall campaign number. Yeah software team already developed fix for it, it's all in the paperwork. We issue recall notice for drivers to check for the OTA to have gone through properly, that is all they need to do.

No maker wants to have safety recalls. It's bad PR. Makers have been fined plenty times for failing to properly inform agencies. One of the most famous is the Takata airbags. Where Takata got fined millions by first knowing and not telling their airbags had extra spicy unstable propellant exploding way too violently. Plus after firstly admitting to it lying to for example NHTSA about the vast extend of the problem.

So it matters, that even on "just a software issue" recalls are issued. The main point is public is properly informed. Lot of time it's resolved without great calamity. However this was exactly the lesson learned. Don't let makers hide issued, make them admit immediately so public knows and can take appropriate mitigation, before someone gets hurt. Also makes makers fix things quickly. Otherwise other priorities might override, since What they don't know can't hurt our reputation, like this is marginal issue. We can take little more time with this. Oh it takes 6 months to design fix with that small team. No worries. After all, no one knows. We have time. Except during that slow roll someone bumps into that "marginal issue" and gets hurt. Having to publicly admit immediately puts fire under their hind quarters. "Whole design department, stop what you are doing. We have safety recall issue. It went just public. Everyday company sits without being able to say No worries, we have solution we take flack. This is now priority number 1. This must be resolved yesterday, says the company board. Whatever parts or equipment you need, order it. Whomever you need to call, call them."

Also be careful with polarity. Here is an article with some basics of power jacks.

https://learn.sparkfun.com/tutorials/connector-basics/power-connectors

It would have to be personal imports. Since the regulation concerns not just the manufacturer, but Any natural or legal person that places on the market product (that phrasing appears lot on the regulation 😆). So for example importers and distributors. A retail electronics shop is responsible to make sure they don't offer on sale any new product with no replaceable battery. Obviously to their own amount of reasonable amount of responsibility. Retailer isn't responsible to go check the product in detail for all the nitty gritty technical compliance, but they have to do due diligence from the manufacturer or importer on "and this product you offer us does fulfil EU regulations. You do have the spare batteries in offer like regulation demands, you plan to honor the 5 year offer period of spare batteries" and so on. Can't be knowingly importing or retail selling non compliant products.

Well that makes the assumption of no new service rises to replace twitter, which given development and spreading of Internet is pretty bad bet.

All this leads to is momentary disruption until people settle on the new replacement, whatever that ends up being.

All this does is caused sacking of twitter employees and Musk burning a pile of money. Oh and politics wonks and journalists have to change their congregation behavior to new place.