Another form of tech industry Gaza atrocity denialism and gaslighting is satellite maps of Gaza.
Bing maps seems to be entirely pre-war as far as I can tell. In a way, that's kind of useful, as it can serve as a reference for what Gaza used to look like in A/B comparisons.
Google maps on the other hand has had at least some updates. Southern Gaza appears basically unscathed, but the Northern part shows some wide swathes where there's very little left but dust and rubble. I think Google did that update a couple months ago. Before that it was kind of hard to find any serious damage at all. (Jabalia refugee camp has shown as a ruin before that update.)
To some extent it's understandable that neither company wants to be updating all of their satellite images all the time. Still, the war has been going on for years and this is a place that a huge number of people really want to know what's going on. Updating slowly (Google) or not at all (Microsoft) at this point seem like deliberate policies, and I'd imagine they're probably highly contentious within those companies.
Nah, the main thing is that electric motors are already far better than they need to be -- even assuming the claims are all true, it would only make a small difference.
Shaving a couple percent off the total vehicle weight would still be a very good thing, but improving batter energy density by 10% or so would be a bigger deal for most EVs.
There might be some niche applications where the battery weight isn't the biggest issue -- like very short-range, light-weight vehicles that need to have enormous amounts of power for some reason.
I could see motors like this being used in power tools if they can be scaled down. A light-weight plug-in electric chainsaw would be pretty awesome.
Small wimpy ones are widely available. I'd love to have an electric chainsaw that runs on 220v and has a respectably long bar, but those don't seem to be available in the US as far as I can tell.
At 30 amps and 220 volts, that would be about 8 horsepower. I think most motors that size rated for that much continuous power would be rather heavy.
> "All greenhouse gas emissions come from one of five sources"
> (Graphic shows electricity generation 28%, transportation 16%, agriculture 19%, buildings 7%, manufacturing 30%)
There's another large source of human greenhouse gas emissions that will perhaps be the most difficult to do anything about and which as far as I know we don't have much in the way of hard numbers about, and that is emissions from military activity. Not just wars, but ordinary peace-time training, patrol operations, hauling stuff around, and so on.
Is running a fake cell tower technically against FCC regulations? Any possibility of just reporting them to the FCC and causing them to incur fines or take them down?
The people at FCC are just government officials. They'd be foolish to antagonize the leadership of the executive branch based on just principles (I know how unscrupulous this sounds. But such are times). Besides, they are up against one of the most heavily funded rogue forces in the world that is also known to go after people outside their jurisdiction (citizens) with impunity.
This turned into something of an internet meme, with people claiming that Hamas was destroying their own critical water infrastructure to make rockets.
Apparently the actual pipe that was dug up in the video was originally installed by Israelis to supply water to an Israeli settlement, long since abandoned. It wasn't actually being used, and there were no prospects for it being used again any time soon.
> "The war and the condition of the Palestinian population is 100% the responsibility of their government, Hamas, that continues fighting and holding Israeli hostages."
No. Israel is an occupying power, and they're heavily restricting food and aid to civilians.
Collective punishment is prohibited by article 33 of the 4th Geneva convention. Starvation as a method of war is prohibited by article 54 of the additional protocols. Shooting civilians is a war crime.
Hamas is guilty of a lot of things, but they aren't forcing Israel to shoot and starve civilians. That's not a necessary part of Israel's war effort. It doesn't help defeat Hamas or make Israel safer.
Israel is not occupying the areas of Gaza where there are civilians in any meaningful way. If it was then the war would be over.
Israel is considered an "occupying power" in Gaza by some from a legal perspective simply because the status of Gaza was not fully resolved following Israel's withdrawal in 2005. I.e. because Israel withdrew unilaterally, not as part of an agreement, some consider it to still be the "occupying power" since 2005. However Israel is not present in Gaza, does not run Gaza, does not physically control Gaza, since 2005.
The current military situation is that Israel controls 65% of the ground, where there are no civilians, and the rest is controlled by Hamas.
Starvation of civilians is indeed prohibited. However siege is permitted as long as civilians can leave. So a siege of Gaza city or the northern Gaza strip would be permitted as long as civilians are allowed to leave that area. A similar example would be Mosul that was under siege while being controlled by ISIS.
Killing civilians in the course of attacking military objectives is not prohibited. Intentional killing of civilians for no military purpose would be a war crime. Israeli soldiers who intentionally kill Palestinian civilians for no military reason should be put on trial. Either way, the context is the armed conflict/war which is what Hamas started and is still pursuing. IDF soldiers are killed and injured in Gaza every day, this just doesn't make the news or Hacker News.
Israel has sufficient control that they can decide whether or how much food enters Gaza, and they have substantial control over the means by which food is distributed. (Aid organizations apply to them for travel permits so that they don't get attacked by IDF forces.) That's the relevant thing here, not whether they have 100% control on the ground.
Siege is permitted only so far as it doesn't leave civilians without food or vital supplies. Occupying powers may remove the civilian population to a safe place temporarily. I don't think "we asked them to leave and they didn't" is regarded as an acceptable middle ground. Starvation of civilians as a method of war was specifically one of the charges by the ICC against Netanyahu and Gallant. (That was based on things that happened earlier in the war.)
Besides, for several months recently, Israel blocked all food and aid into Gaza. The civilians had absolutely nowhere to go.
If similar war crimes happened in Mosul those should be prosecuted too.
I agree Israel has control over aid entering Gaza. I also agree that civilians should not be starved.
In recent weeks though Israel has allowed aid into Gaza but the UN has not been picking it up and distributing it. Israel brings it outside the area that Hamas controls and asks the UN to truck it in. Those trucks then get looted or the goods just sit there because the UN agencies refuse to pick it up. Some food recently had to be destroyed because it expired sitting on the platforms. Obviously Israeli soldiers can't truck the aid into Hamas controlled Gaza themselves.
I'm pretty sure "we asked them to leave but they didn't" is actually sufficient. How else is the population going to move?
Otherwise how exactly would a siege work? You're expecting the enemy to cooperate?
Anyways, I don't think a siege is workable here even if legal, and we can see why. There has been political pressure in Israel to at the very least prevent Hamas from controlling the aid.
It's true that Israel blocked aid for a few months. This was after the strip was flooded with aid during the previous ceasefire.
"Gaza kitchens warn food will run out in days after two months of Israeli blockade" (will run out in days - May 2nd). So at least a few days after May 2nd we know there was still some food available.
The GHF started distributing food on May 26th.
I don't know for sure what is the food situation in Gaza at every given moment. In theory the IDF says they have been monitoring it. So it's their word vs. Hamas. We also had people killed sitting in a cafe at the end of June so presumably there were some ingredients for that cafe to be open and serving customers. That's very anecdotal. I'm sure there are pockets of poverty, hunger and more. If you have money or the right connections you're probably getting food. The fair distribution of food within Hamas controlled Gaza isn't something the IDF has control of.
The UN has also refused to collaborate with the GHF and Hamas has been attacking the aid centers and the Palestinians that help deliver aid there. Yes, the setup is far from ideal, but Israel has a right to try and get Hamas out of the aid loop. At the very least there are other players here, not just Israel, to share some of the blame.
There's a war and a siege. I'm sure it's a great place to be.
The Warsaw Ghetto comparison is despicable. Jewish people in Warsaw weren't holding German hostages or fighting a war with the Germans. They didn't murder and kidnap German or Polish civilians. The situation in the Warsaw Ghetto was an order of magnitude worse than what Hamas is saying the situation in Gaza is. Hamas has a very clear option here, to surrender and release the hostages.
Israel is now delivering a lot more aid into Gaza. The Jews in Warsaw were sent to death camps.
Are you kidding me? I also have a video of a cat windsurfing, I'm sure it's in Gaza. The airdrops are totally ineffective as a method of distributing aid, but apparently pretty effective as whitewashing propaganda.
Any sliver of relief allowed by the IDF is under growing international pressure. Gaza is becoming a death camp, no need to send anyone elsewhere.
Restricting food to civilians has been a legitimate war tactic forever. It's called a siege. If this is unacceptable to Palestine, they need to return the Israeli hostages.
Israel is under no obligation to provide aid to their opponent in a war. Anybody suggesting such is transparently anti-Semitic. Nobody would ever make such a ridiculous claim if it were their own countrymen held hostage.
I think the thing that should have been a clear unambiguous sign (if nothing up to then were convincing enough) that Israel's intentions weren't just to defeat Hamas but cause severe harm to the civilian population of Gaza was when they blocked all food and aid into Gaza for months. I mean, why would you do that unless you want people to die?
Even the stated explanation that they wanted to deprive Hamas of the ability to fundraise by stealing food and selling it back didn't make sense. Food shortages would cause the market value of hoarded food to rise, thus helping Hamas. Flooding the region with food would collapse the prices and deprive them of a revenue stream.
The intention was clearly communicated from day 1. But Western governments willingly decided to provide diplomatic cover & military support - some to this very day - with the backing of the Western media apparatus.
"destroy Hamas" has become "kill everyone with Hamas sympathies" -- but you can be sure that every boy who can carry a gun, who has seen family members die, who is living the destruction and desolation, is itching for a chance to join the next version of Hamas (which may not be Hamas itself, but something else built on the same shouldering fires that burn when people are oppressed, bombed, and starved, repeatedly for generations. They're not destroying Hamas -- they're just creating a new one (if anyone survives).
The market value of hoarded food going up only helps Hamas if they are the one managing to do the hoarding - otherwise it actually works against Hamas (if there's another distributor)
Exactly. If Hamas is doing it, it's self-defeating. If Hamas isn't doing it then you're just starving people. Because the point is just starvation, nothing to do with Hamas.
BTW, all orgs (other than the lyin' IDF) says Hamas wasn't stealing significant amounts of aid (nowhere near the 10% claimed). Therefore it's clear starvation was the goal, not targeting funding or Hamas at all.
How is it self-defeating? Hamas is able to continue fighting with the more aid they steal. By stealing aid they also increase the suffering in Gaza thus winning the propaganda war.
Even the IDF now admits it had no evidence of Hamas systematically stealing aid [0].
Yet the talking point - which attempted to justify genocide and never had a shred of evidence - will linger for years. I still meet people who think Saddam did 9/11, or that Afghanistan was connected.
I still meet many people who don't even know a third tower fell in NYC that day. When news media repeats a talking point that long, or ignores evidence that long, it makes a very deep impression on the type of person who takes things at face value a little too much.
3340s are more DIY-friendly though, as they're DIP packages.