The vast majority of them volunteered. And that's just conscription -- every country would do the same in such a situation. The US pursued and prosecuted thousands of cases of draft dodging in WW2, forcing most of them to go and fight.
>the President may grant a 1-time extension of not more than 90 days with respect to the date on which this subsection would otherwise apply to such application pursuant to paragraph (2), if the President certifies to Congress that--
(A) a path to executing a qualified divestiture has been identified with respect to such application;
>(B) evidence of significant progress toward executing such qualified divestiture has been produced with respect to such application; and
>(C) there are in place the relevant binding legal agreements to enable execution of such qualified divestiture during the period of such extension.
It seems highly unlikely any of those criteria are being. Trump is not even suggesting it, never mind providing receipts.
Seems like a pretty vacuous article if “megaregions” are so poorly defined. Anyone who has ever driven between Spokane and Portland or Seattle knows it could hardly be considered “mega”.
I think the consensus is that the Portland-Seattle-Vancouver corridor is the "real" megaregion of the PNW. That corridor has ~10 million people and a high per capita GDP, especially the middle part which kind of ties it together.
If you were going to include Spokane, it isn't that much of a stretch to include Boise as well.
Yea, that makes sense. I think you can conceivably define a megaregion to include places like the PNW corridor, the bay area, research triangle, etc. I'm just a bit baffled how Spokane and the region between makes the cut. Seems like the author just wanted to draw a bigger circle.
Some of these megaregions really are "kind of one thing" like Southern California, others are pretty separated. Spokane is close to Seattle and Portland so there's traffic there, but I don't know they really operate as one "region".
Why to avoid this? Well, it is adding more systemd-specific bits and new build dependency to something that always worked well under other inits without any problems for years.
They chose the worst solution to a problem that had multiple better solutions because of a pre-existing patch was the easiest path forward. That’s exactly what I’m talking about.
As someone who uses a rolling release, I use btrfs because I don't want to deal with keeping ZFS up to date.
It's been really good for me. And btrbk is the best backup solution I've had on Linux, btrfs send/receive is a lot faster than rsync even when sending non-incremental snapshots.
Same here: I use a rolling release and btrfs. Personally I really enjoy btrfs's snapshot feature. Most of the time when I need backups it's not because of a hardware failure but because of a fat finger mistake where I rm'ed a file I need. Periodic snapshots completely solved that problem for me.
(Of course, backing up to another disk is absolutely still needed, but you probably need it less than you think.)
Depends on the rolling release; some distros specifically provide a kernel package that is still rolling, but is also always the latest version compatible with ZFS.
I think the larger issue is that openzfs doesn't move in sync with the kernel so you have to check https://raw.githubusercontent.com/openzfs/zfs/master/META to make sure you can actually upgrade each time. On a rolling distro this is a pretty common breakage AFAIK. It's not the end of the world, but it is annoying.
Yea, there needs to be a `snapshot -r` option or something. I like using subvolumes to manage what gets a snapshot but sometimes you want the full disk.
