The Trump Administration seems to have significantly loosened ITAR for almost everyone (IIRC primarily intended to make it less onerous for small arms researchers and manufacturers), including individuals, and specifically addresses removing some forms of software and designs from the USML.
If it's firmware or designs as far as I'm aware there may be no problem with that now, even if it's rocketry or guidance software.
Among my many random roles in my job, I do export technical licensing review. I can assure you the industry practices on ITAR have only tightened in recent years, and the only language clarifications that have affected my review policies are over 4 years old.
Small arms researchers and manufacturers who are inside the US should not be affected by ITAR nearly at all. The only restriction ITAR / EAR places on a US company is to not sell or share technical assistance (any kind of design, etc) with any foreign persons (which includes public disclosure).
What he may have done is change the classification of certain small arms technologies. But that does not affect the "ITAR" process or its "looseness".
Yeah, I think there are a lot of distro bugs, and a lot of old or mismatched packages, outside of the Arch/Manjaro ecosystem. This hurts the impression of Mesa, the Kernel, and basically anything else like this where there's no good reason conventional distros shouldn't ship new feature releases at least a bit more frequently than they do.
> One of the neat things about PalmOS is that it ran apps directly from where they were stored. No need to load them into "memory".
In practice this is not the way it worked on PalmOS on actual hardware past a certain point, and the way it actually worked is not that different from how code is loaded in a conventional desktop operating system.
Is there any plan to integrate with or produce your own wheelchair routing, and help with accessibility information for ways as well as points of interest (what WheelMap does right now).
I've moved to a smaller city; and while things are clean and generally well maintained, there are many neglected sections of sidewalks here which would not be accessible to some forms of wheelchair. I do a lot of walking so I am in a good position to gather data like this, but it seems that the effort for this is not as organized.
There are also some non-wheelchair accessibility issues in mapping between new construction and old; for example, textured pavement placed according to new standards, further back from the roadway, but the zebra crossing marks and stop lines were painted according to older standards, closer to the roadway.
I think it would be nice not only to treat this as a repository of useful information for people looking to access these ways, but as a tool to identify, triage, and resolve accessibility issues.
It then considers elevation and many restrictions already but it is probably not as fine tuned as it should be. We would be happy to accept improvements.
I think you need a couple more things than that, like marking excessive cross-slopes, and having a better way to mark mid-way issues. The fields definitely exist, but there's not really a focused method of entering data like this, and it's not clear to me how to do this without messing up the presentation.
wheelchair-routing is a difficult, unsolved problem IMHO. Yes you can use a profile in Graphhopper and the Heidelberg University did a large project as well.
When talking with wheelchair users I learnt that they often improvise on the routes they take, for example crossing the road even without curb-cut because it is quicker for them or trash bins blocking the sidewalk.
We plan to integrate a base layer design like https://www.accessmap.io/ which can help with basic orientation (eg. red-colored streets if they have a steep incline for example).
At the same time it would be great to have very detailed data about sidewalks in general. Apart from OSM I think this is an interesting definition: https://sharedstreets.io/
There is nothing racist about economic sanctions against a country which is in active conflict with our armed forces outside of their borders, which is actively engaged in psy-ops to destabilize American society.
Economic sanctions against America would not be racism against scots/germans/west africans or whatever.
You can argue against sanctions on all sorts of grounds, but the flimsiest is claiming that they're racist.
> There is nothing racist about economic sanctions against a country which is in active conflict with our armed forces outside of their borders
I think that singing about how you want to destroy the country, how you want to choke it etc. do prove racist tendencies.
As for armed forces acting outside of borders, you cannot claim that U.S. armed forces are any more 'authorized' to be in these places than Iranian ones, can you?
So in the end, it comes down to nothing more than the U.S. having the ability to implement these sanctions and Iran not, there's no 'principles' in it, just geo-politics.
What is remarkable however is that this pandemic is a uniquely challenging situation even for countries not under sanctions, so placing new sanctions on the country, as was recently done, is plain inhumane.
Characterizing this as “discrimination against Persian people” is extremely dishonest. There are like half a million Persian people in America alone, as many as there are Wyomingites, who have the same access to GitLab as anyone else; this is a question of commerce between the U.S. and Iran, not a question of discrimination against Persians.
