bxbb
Geoff Huston discuss this a few months back. The economic incentives helps shape centralized internet, to the point that most of today's traffic is cache push and private peering between major providers, rather than network transit.
https://blog.apnic.net/2025/08/21/podcast-the-inevitability-...
Which kind of make sense, since with peering both end of the infra (if separate entity) can negotiate for better terms upfront. While the latter is basically unpredictable opex based on traffic shape and routing algorithm.
https://support.google.com/mail/answer/15263077
Constantly receiving email from one alias is fine since it signals a subscription-like communications. Recycling through different aliases for the same recepient is surefire way to get flagged.
If you want to "personalize" the email, just add the name of the marketer in the subject or footer.
In your mentioned region, Sichuan, lies Chengdu plain which border the mountain range. Making the demographic line also meander along from Beichuang to Songpan to Chengdu. There's another meander along Hanzong further north, and Yunnan in the south.
Think of the wheels as a power bank: It convert and temporarily store linear force to rotational force. As long as it accumulated enough power to counter the rolling resistance, headwind drag, gravity, gearing loss, etc; the excess rotational force can be used to spin the prop. Which in turn generate additional push to be converted and stored.
Within this "loop", the vehicle got two linear input, tailwind and propeller. This will allow continuous acceleration once the vehicle goes faster than tailwind up to the point where the additional force from the prop is completely negated.
You argued about "good faith" but your entire argument is based on one side being bad actor while ignoring the contemporary issue inside Taiwan itself. Taiwan already repeatedly stated that they don't need to "declare independence" since PRC is the rogue one. Unlike Tibet, it never got conquered. Unlike Hong Kong, it never handed over by previous custodian (Japan "acknowledge" whoever control Taiwan as its government, but establish diplomatic relationship with PRC later).
What matters is how they identify themselves as sovereign state. Separation of identity only started to formally considered after DPP won their first presidency in 2000. Meaning that majority of the adult population was raised with pan-China identity rather than separate Taiwanese identity. Which shows in 2004 referendum, where it failed due to low turnout. Since then, their strategy is to gradually push for identity shift while empowering indigenous population as counterbalance against KMT's popularity.
Subsequent position by KMT politician also soften the stance to acknowledge a stalemate (that PRC is not a rebel but de facto ruler of Mainland China) but refused to cede the position of de jure claimant.
> There is no invocation of the idea of what is morally right. There is no contemplation of what the Taiwanese people see as best for themselves.
Who are we to be a moral arbiter and decide what's best for others using warships? To call it a settled issue while Taiwanese still in the process of identity transition is, quite frankly, authoritarian decision.
Which is the point of my argument: they're currently sorting it out. And so far PRC is unwilling to use force to settle the dispute, which is a good sign. Any provocation by third party only put the Taiwanese in difficult position, since they are only treated as a proxy to pressure and "contain" China.
> Do you not see the slightest problem with the situation of holding a gun to someones head and then shouting "ARE YOU INDEPENDENT?!"
I don't, because that's not what happened. Taiwan is not the one China point the gun at, the rest of the world is. Don't you think its funny that for all the noise the West make, none of them formally acknowledge Taiwan sovereignty and dare to establish diplomatic relationship?
Compare the situation with state breakups in Caucasus and Balkan region, and you'll see that as long as PRC is "useful" and not as powerful, they'll be happy playing two legged approach.
> "Look, they said they're not independent, this is obviously an internal issue."
It's not due to lack of independence claim (see above), but because its pertained to the national identity, regardless of what current politician in power said. You don't "label" people as Taiwanese, Han, Hakka, Hokkien, etc. They have all the right to think, decide, and act upon their identity on their own volition. Whether pan-China identity or Taiwanese identity prevails is up to the Taiwanese citizen, hence it's an internal issue.
The problem with externally-triggered aggressiveness is that they also provide opportunity for pro-unification side within Taiwan to push their narrative and hold back the transition to "maintain the peace" by pushing pan-China identity.
> That scenario makes no sense
But that's exactly what happened with Taiwan-China situation. One is the exiled successor government, while the others is communist rebel that maintain control of the territory.
Up until 2000 election, Kuomintang still hold majority power, with brief resurgence during 2008 election after DPP tried to separate Taiwan identity from China proper. The party position is generally unchanged: that they consider themselves the true government of China.
DPP's position to ignore one-China conundrum historically met with skepticism from industrialist and labor population, since a clear separation between two entities would mean a substantial damage in economy. DPP only regained their votes in 2016 after softening their stance on independence. And they're [slowly losing trust](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Taiwanese_presidential_el...) from swing voters, again.
So, yeah. Until Taiwan could make up its mind about their national identity and cross-strait relationship with Mainland China, it's still an internal issue.
> say Trump won through an obviously fraudulent election, and Hawaii no longer wanted to be a part of America (rightfully so!), and the Chinese military was protecting Hawaii from being ruled without public consent, I would very much be happy about this Chinese fleet.
That's a wildly different analogy. Imagine instead, that while the last election result is contested, a mob successfully storm the Capitol and reinstate Trump in his second term. Biden flee to Hawaii and declare the state as US government in exile.
Fast forward 30 years and nothing really settled between Republican in US and Democrats in Hawaii because diplomacy is hard and both refused to negotiate (one had the power while the other had the legitimacy). And then China started to put their fleet because Blacks, Native American, and "Hawaiian" is oppressed.
How would you think that would affect those people's future?
the manual already cover this issue[1]. In short, rebase when you pull if you prefer to, but always merge when you push.
[1] http://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Branching-Rebasing#The-Perils...
- have revision support. A basic diff is available inside Word (Compare version).
- Breaking up the procedures as individual document can be done using outline view. Sub document can be created, imported from new files, or extracted from current master document.
- Co-authoring feature which enable multiple editors work on a same file, owner can review and accept/reject changes.
- Inventory management (I assume involving database) can be done using either Access or Excel.
What make SharePoint so nice is the Composites, which allow you to working with multiple datasource (Office files, SQL, Webservices). A handbook is available here: http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=3605...
Note: document outline doesn't require SharePoint (it's a built in feature of Word), co-authoring require either SharePoint or SkyDrive account to host the document.
It's much more accurate that way.
corrected, that's how the torrent work :p
this, and the rest of API-specific features will add 0.5 to make it completely "worth" the 3.0 tag.
Wrong pick on the OS name, I guess :P.