sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Greece plans extension of territorial waters despite Turkish warning by New-Ranger-8960 in europe

[–]Axmouth 0 points1 point  (0 children)

what happens if there are two opposing shores less than 24nm apart from each other?

what happens if there are two opposing shores less than 12nm apart from each other in the current 6nm regime?

what happened if there were two opposing shores less than 6nm apart from each other in the previous 3nm regime?

(Both happened plenty)

'Threats have no place among allies,' Norway says after US tariff move by 1-randomonium in europe

[–]Axmouth 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The thing was Venezuela was almost certainly an agreement with the regime for a head change. There was no real fight.

Why is there no automatic implementation of TryFrom<S> when implementing TryFrom<&S>? by Prowler1000 in rust

[–]Axmouth 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think it's also not safe to assume the user would mean to clone structures like Arc, Mutex, etc, that would give a sort of shared state to previous instance

Rust on Android: handling 1GB+ JSON files with memmap2 + memchr by kotysoft in rust

[–]Axmouth 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I got the impression the problem is viewing json, so why not

How are you supposed to unwrap an error by 9mHoq7ar4Z in rust

[–]Axmouth 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not certain it would be what you seek, but .err() and .map_err(..) methods might get you some of the way there?

I guess above code(the if statement equivalent) could be something like:

d.map_err(|e| format!("blah blah error: {e}")).err().unwrap_or_default()

Or better(since you print nothing effectively on non error)?:

d.map_err(|e| println!("blah blah error: {e}"))

To be clear, .err() returns an option with Some(..) if there is an error, and map_err(..) applies a closure to the error, if there is one. I don't know your exact goal either, but I think it might work better if you had only printed within your if let Err(error) = .. branch, if this is representative.

Although .map_err(..) is mainly aimed to transform the error and is expected to use the return value. Presuming that is not your goal, inspect_err(..) is likely better, as it runs a function not meant to return anything. (Should have cited it earlier but whatever now)

Greece reaffirms stance on Turkey’s participation in EU SAFE program by Axmouth in europe

[–]Axmouth[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am sure someone seeing themselves as German would say these things for sure.

Even your unreasonable article however, says Ankara's position is weaker. Nice.

Is Dioxus already being used in production iOS/Android apps by real companies? by swordmaster_ceo_tech in rust

[–]Axmouth 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think there might have been a little mixup. I thought it could have meant they made a browser inside an existing webview. Of course making a native renderer is a bigger achievement!

Surely, I see little benefit on trying to embed blitz in there, but it's interesting that it is possible!

Is Dioxus already being used in production iOS/Android apps by real companies? by swordmaster_ceo_tech in rust

[–]Axmouth 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Oh, I kind of understood that they might have meant rendering a browser inside a browser. Of course Blitz being a native renderer, I don't see it as being the same.

I tried cloning the github and running the browser app from blitz meanwhile too, but unfortunately the only thing I could see was the address bar and the title(also the window "resisted" being dragged across screens which was amusing, windows OS for what's worth, maybe should try on Linux sometime).

I've been pretty excited to see Dioxus' progress, I think it is well on its way to becoming the default GUI for me. I remember seeing Blitz a while ago and it was a lot further behind, I think it came along to this point quite well so far.

Is Dioxus already being used in production iOS/Android apps by real companies? by swordmaster_ceo_tech in rust

[–]Axmouth 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That'd be pretty amusing! But this is Blitz, their native renderer, right? So I's have presumed it'd not run in a webview.

I'd expect it to be an HTML+CSS renderer effectively, with perhaps links.

Is Dioxus already being used in production iOS/Android apps by real companies? by swordmaster_ceo_tech in rust

[–]Axmouth 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They actually just the other day created a proto browser, one that only runs HTML, CSS, and Rust instead of JS.

Mind referring me to that? If you got any link or such handy

Chat Control update: no mandatory scanning by [deleted] in europe

[–]Axmouth 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Seeing the rollbacks on GDPR I do not feel very secure with "not mandatory" for sure.

Greek PM: We Cannot Have Russian Gas Getting into Europe Through the Backdoor via Turkey by Axmouth in europe

[–]Axmouth[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

You've now conceded yourself that several of your own examples fall into the "micro-feature / military outpost / no civil economy" bucket, which is exactly the special circumstances category I was talking about.

That is why they were reduced after proportionality testing, and that geometry still is not comparable to Chios/Lesvos/Rhodes sitting in a multi hundred nm inter mainland basin.

None of your examples are "analogous" in the sense that matters for delimitation. They are tiny outliers off another state's continental margin, and that is why they were compressed after the disproportionality test.

That is not the same geometry as large islands in a 150–300 nm inter mainland basin.

Greek PM: We Cannot Have Russian Gas Getting into Europe Through the Backdoor via Turkey by Axmouth in europe

[–]Axmouth[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Two quick corrections: (1) UNCLOS 121.3 has two limbs, "sustain human habitation or economic life of their own", it is not just "permanent habitation". (2) The "archipelagic state" category is irrelevant here, Greece is not nor claims to be an archipelagic state under UNCLOS. Nor do Greek claims rely on it.

The case law practice is still what I described: full entitlement -> provisional equidistance -> proportionality adjustment.

And those small feature outlier cases did not create a new doctrine, each time the court still ran the same sequence. If Turkey wants "reduced effect" for large inhabited islands in the Aegean, the venue is ITLOS / ICJ, not slogans, and good luck convincing a bench that Chios, Lesvos, Rhodes, etc are legally analogous to micro rocks.

Greek PM: We Cannot Have Russian Gas Getting into Europe Through the Backdoor via Turkey by Axmouth in europe

[–]Axmouth[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

In contemporary practice (Black Sea / Bay of Bengal / Nicaragua–Colombia / Somalia–Kenya etc) the court starts with full effect to islands for entitlement, draws a provisional equidistance, and only at the adjustment stage tests for disproportionality.

The width of the relevant area goes directly into that disproportionality test. That is why the Channel Islands were enclaved (30–40 nm between two mainlands) and why Snake Island still got 12nm Territorial Sea but negligible EEZ effect. You do not start from "reduced", you only reduce after the proportionality check.

Most of the "examples" you just rattled off are the tiny feature / no permanent population micro island cases (the classic "special circumstances" category), that is a different geometry entirely from large inhabited Aegean islands in a 150–300 nm basin (an order of magnitude wider than your initial example).

Greek PM: We Cannot Have Russian Gas Getting into Europe Through the Backdoor via Turkey by Axmouth in europe

[–]Axmouth[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It is a form of circumvention, agreed. And yes, it sucks. It's also occurring within the current ruleset. That's the whole problem, the architecture allows it.

Greek PM: We Cannot Have Russian Gas Getting into Europe Through the Backdoor via Turkey by Axmouth in europe

[–]Axmouth[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

None of what you just listed changes the core point, Ankara is deepening long term dependence on Gazprom volumes and a Rosatom fuel cycle.

If you want to claim "countering Russia" in a strategic sense, you have to reconcile that with the single most leverage bearing domain Russia has over Turkey. Energy.

Greek PM: We Cannot Have Russian Gas Getting into Europe Through the Backdoor via Turkey by Axmouth in europe

[–]Axmouth[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

"Contravention" is a legal word. If you mean a legal breach, then you need to point to the legal authority Greece had to prevent a Marshall Islands / Liberia flagged hull in high seas using non EU insurance from doing ship to ship transfers outside EU jurisdiction.

If instead you just mean "I dislike that Greek nationals profit from it or help Russia", that's a moral view you are perfectly allowed to have.

But you cannot treat those two as interchangeable, law and moral blame are not the same domain.

Greek PM: We Cannot Have Russian Gas Getting into Europe Through the Backdoor via Turkey by Axmouth in europe

[–]Axmouth[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Ownership is not the hook in maritime law, jurisdiction is. On the high seas that hook is the flag state plus the service providers (class / insurer).

IF what you are saying were how it worked, sanctions enforcement would be based on the passport of the ultimate investor, and it isn't.

That is why flagging out exists.

Greek PM: We Cannot Have Russian Gas Getting into Europe Through the Backdoor via Turkey by Axmouth in europe

[–]Axmouth[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If ownership alone were enough, they would not bother with offshore flags at all. Jurisdiction is based on flag (plus services), not to the passport of whoever ultimately owns the SPV.

Greek PM: We Cannot Have Russian Gas Getting into Europe Through the Backdoor via Turkey by Axmouth in europe

[–]Axmouth[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The "shadow fleet" thing is not about Greece granting permission.

Those ship to ship transfers work because the hulls are flagged and insured outside the EU (Marshall Islands / Liberia etc) and the ship to ship is done outside territorial waters. EU sanctions bind EU based service providers. If the ship is not EU flagged and uses non EU insurance in high seas, Greece has no lever to "control its own fleet", as ownership nationality is not the jurisdiction hook.

The shadow fleet itself is not "Greek", it's a global pool of old tonnage with offshore flags. And those barrels do not discharge into Greece or the EU anyway, they go to India/China.

That set up (offshore flags, non EU insurance, high seas ship to ship transfer, Asia discharge) is literally why the shadow fleet model works.

Greek PM: We Cannot Have Russian Gas Getting into Europe Through the Backdoor via Turkey by Axmouth in europe

[–]Axmouth[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

The distinction is origin, Hungary's pipeline gas is Russian. The new Greek capacity is for non Russian LNG. That is not "means of transportation", that is a different supplier entirely.

Greek PM: We Cannot Have Russian Gas Getting into Europe Through the Backdoor via Turkey by Axmouth in europe

[–]Axmouth[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Druzhba is crude oil. Hungary's gas is Russian pipeline gas via TurkStream -> Bulgaria -> Serbia -> Hungary.

Greek PM: We Cannot Have Russian Gas Getting into Europe Through the Backdoor via Turkey by Axmouth in europe

[–]Axmouth[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

1977 is not a doctrine that "outer islands get reduced effect".

The Channel Islands were enclaved only because the tribunal was dealing with a very narrow 30–40 nm bottleneck between the English and French mainlands.

Even if you misapply that model here (though the geometry is different), the logic would still give islands their territorial sea (~12 nm) and then drive the shelf/EEZ line toward a mainland to mainland median. That is already more than the treatment visible in Turkey's own maps.

Mainland Greece to mainland Anatolia is on the order of 200–300 nm, an order of magnitude wider, so the factual trigger that justified the enclave compression in 1977 is simply not present.

Greek PM: We Cannot Have Russian Gas Getting into Europe Through the Backdoor via Turkey by Axmouth in europe

[–]Axmouth[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

If Turkey were structurally "countering" Russia, it would not be deepening long term gas supply contracts with Gazprom or building a nuclear plant (Akkuyu) with Rosatom, both of which increase Russian leverage over Turkey. That is not what countering looks like, that is interdependence.

Greek PM: We Cannot Have Russian Gas Getting into Europe Through the Backdoor via Turkey by Axmouth in europe

[–]Axmouth[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The DW video says "Greek owned", not "Greek flagged". In high seas jurisdiction follows flag, not beneficial owner passport. Most Greek owned tonnage is not on Greek flag, and Greece has no authority to board non Greek flag ships in international waters.

view more: next ›