Look, while I am sure what Musk says is very important, what is also important it's that many millions of people live (used to live?) on territories Russia claims. Ukraine cannot just give up on its citizens. Certainly not because Musk says something on Twitter. If it does, and does it easily, how am I as a Ukrainian citizen to know that my region (a would-be border region) is not next to be given up on?
> Since the beginning of the war, there are literally hundreds of similar examples. Not calling it appeasement would earn you the title of "Russian asset".
The point is that a famous name gives an edge in peer review to a (potentially mediocre) paper written primarily by somebody else with the famous name appended.
> You clearly haven't ever bought a ticket. £30 please, unless you want to travel after 10am, then it'll be 25, oh wait you want to go via Reading that'll be 40. Haha, you got through the barrier tapping your oyster card? That doesn't work out here!
That statement surprised me as well. Isn't "Off Peak" lingo confusing for foreign visitors? I know I used to find it annoying to have to care about that, and how there are different kinds of "Anytime" tickets that do or do not cover multiple rail networks.
Isn't there a difference between not hanging out with drunk people and not drinking alcohol? Some people have a glass of wine with their meal, for instance.
Depending on where you live, everyone. Large parts of Europe have that. And it doesn’t make a difference. Getting plastered is when you need to watch out because then it gets repetitive and boring.
Perhaps, surprisingly, it might go both ways: when I know who is on the PC, I think I can tell which person wrote which review, because I both know their work and met them personally. In fact, those people on the PC is why I am submitting to a venue in the first place, because I want reviewers who will easily understand my work.
I think your question makes a lot of sense in the general case, but in case of NASA it very well might be that they scratched their heads, came up with requirements and found that they don't care about there being an ecosystem of any kind due to special nature of their requirements.
> Especially if an open ISA means that our systems will be more portable and faster to develop.
So I understand that RISC-V does not immediately impose licensing fees, but how does that translate into portability and speed of development? I'd think that tools and toolchains do not especially benefit from there not being licensing fees, and do benefit from somebody paying cool kernel/compiler hackers. Tools hardware designers use as well as the designs themselves will stay closed. What am I missing?
> Since the beginning of the war, there are literally hundreds of similar examples. Not calling it appeasement would earn you the title of "Russian asset".
How does such a title matter?