It is because Calibri was made with reading inclusion in mind (no thin slanted lines) and the current office actively working to exclude as many people as possible for no obvious reason other than pettiness.

Although, maybe they want to start writing in latin one day again too, so to exclude even more people (like the old days when only the elite were able to read relevant sources).

Europe, ESA, and a good amount of space actors have signed the zero debris charter that aims to increase the accuracy at which satellites are to deorbit when their activities have seized and to prevent space debris in a preventative approach.

ESA also has active plans to recover or extend space operations of satellites that needs servicing via its RISE-mission.

Finally, there are also the CAT and Clearspace-1 missions (amongst others?) which intend to actively remove satellites from orbit, or place them in the graveyard orbit.

Oh, and space lasers (for monitoring space debris).

I guess there are more, but I think this already shows it is actively being developed.

With a view to the upcoming conference, Baer also urged the ESA to be open to reform: What is needed is a mix of expensive, large-scale projects, like the Ariane rocket, and many smaller projects that rely more heavily on start-ups, she said.

Aren’t they already doing this? I see a lot of European space news about a lot of different space companies. Or are many of them not part of the ESA program?

Typical… no indicator lights

Het was echt een schandelijke presentatie weer van Wilders. En hij voelt zich schijnbaar comfortable om met veel trots te roepen dat hij het oké vindt dat er honger wordt geleden in ontwikkelingslanden.

Commenters here should really read the article before making their posts. Many of the critiques I read here are covered in the article.

People can of course have a preference of weather/temperature, however, the ‘bad’ weather in the Netherlands is often exaggerated.

And I have called rain ‘bad weather’ as well, but it took a change in perspective to see that rain is neither good nor bad (it is just a logical consequence of our ecosystem). I now enjoy the occasional rain shower or overcast days.

https://www.hetregentbijnanooit.nl/site/

Bad weather doesn’t exist, only bad clothing. It’s about perspective, I have come to believe.

Det finnes ikke dårlig vær, bare dårlig klær.

deleted by creator

Those parking spaces, though… I hope European parking spaces never grow to similar sizes.

Yeah, and personally, I don’t feel any wish to go back to skeuomorphism. It is funny to look back to and feel some nostalgia, but I think it would look cheap now if they did it like 15 years ago. Maybe iOS’ glassy-ui will create some elements that people like about it, but they luckily did not move back to busy ui element backgrounds.

I do partially agree with his buttons and app-points. I dislike how we are forced to download apps for everything, including the questionable tracking software.

I also don’t see the point in the ‘glass’ blob that floats over menu items. I never/rarely (it makes some sense in the camera app) swipe over menu items, and in my opinion just adds a weird and unnecessary animation (even though it’s a bit smoother now).

In Oslo you can drive Porsche.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OS_MX3000?wprov=sfti1#Specifications

The Chinese too know how to make unnecessary large cars, unfortunately.

The cynic in me directly thought of how this could be a way for Apple to force the Mac App Store on these machines. Granted it is based on a fear, not grounded on something.

If the government’s intent is to cut local emissions this could make sense.

Will the cost of insurance and tax not outweigh the cost of a (monthly) ticket? And (especially older) cars must pass EU controls regularly for them to be road legal.

Considering this is a test to see if car users (they must park in a P&R) would use PT if it were free, it might just be a lead up for proposing it to be free for all.

To add, while the car users are not the ones that need this the most, a reduction in cars (even at the cost of ticket sales) could have positive effects for inhabitants of Aarhus on health and maybe even economic (some research shows that areas with fewer cars see local business thrive).

I agree that both their objective lies in changing regulation. Doesn’t mean that they are the same, however. Which OP stated. And I wouldn’t say it is the only difference, rather the difference between the two.

If there is proof that they have given millions of dollars, this will go to court, as that is illegal. Lobbying is not bribing as I pointed out in my initial reply. Lots of different groups and organisations use lobbying to make their concerns heard. Just because this is a case we don’t like, does not mean lobbying has no purpose.

They are literally not the same. Bribing is when you try to give something in exchange for voting/law making etc. Lobbying is convincing why prioritising is important. These can be selfish reasons, like in this case. However, lobbying may also be done for noble causes by a wide range of NGOs. Prohibiting lobbying is limiting the opportunity for all kinds of actors to argue their cause.