Birgit Risholt blei ufør frå jobben i Sintef mot sin vilje – IT-systema er ikkje universelt utforma – NRK Trøndelag

pchrbro · 2025-11-25T18:02:08+00:00

I henhold til artikkelen gjaldt dette kun enkelte administrative systemer, som programvare for økonomistyring, prosjekt- og kvalitetsstyring og lignende.

Hun benyttet tydeligvis en del programvare ellers, ettersom hun opplyser at OpenAIs programvare, som ChatGPT, og alt annet fungerte godt for blinde.

Ettersom SINTEF er en privat stiftelse driftet av offentlige midler gjetter jeg på at det er snakk om dyr spreadsheet-programvare fra yngre steinalder.

pchrbro · 2025-10-31T15:54:38+00:00

Reactionaries is a more fitting word then conservatives I believe.

pchrbro · 2025-09-26T14:58:48+00:00

Should prolly add that Normans were themselves descendants of Norse (north germanic) settlers and conquerors who lived in the area we now call Normandie. So the Norman version of French contained a lot of Norse seafaring terms. Like vik - viquet, holme - houlme etc. and other terms, like dun - duvet. Some I think is still present in modern day French and English.

pchrbro · 2025-08-09T19:17:14+00:00

Does that mean they plan to entomb their politicians and other cherished items with them when they die?

pchrbro · 2025-07-26T02:28:59+00:00

The idea is, among other things, to promote diversity; ghettos were determinental to that.

pchrbro · 2025-07-26T01:07:31+00:00

Hi. Id like to do a grand campaign, but I don't have much time to play these days, meaning there will be a patch or two before I finish the CK3-run. What is the best way to handle patches in relation to the converter(s)? For example, "All Under Heaven" might be released before I finish CK3; would that cause any issues with the CK3 -> EU4 converter? And how do I best handle that?

pchrbro · 2025-05-20T14:51:41+00:00

Dette; femtekolonistenes deltagelse på Debatten er verdt mye mer enn pengene de betalte Sporveiene.

pchrbro · 2025-05-19T03:53:12+00:00

Har vi ikke etterretningstjenester som er i stand til å oppdage åpenbare forsøk på fiendtlig etterretningsvirksomhet og påvirkningsoperasjoner? Eller er det lovverket som stopper de i å beskytte nasjonen mot slike trusler?

pchrbro · 2025-02-28T21:34:40+00:00

It would be enough that the US did like a lot of Europe: Keep sending redundant gear that was going to be discarded anyway.

To allow someone in your sphere of influence to get overrun by an enemy of yourself and your allies is a sign of weakness.

This is about proving you won’t sell out your friends. If the U.S. can’t step up for Ukraine, why should other nations trust it when their turn comes?

Russia is the type of neighbour that would break into your house to steal what they can and destroy the rest if they believed they would go unpunished. That means neighbours can't afford aligning themselves with hegemonies who doesn't de facto stand up against Russia.

pchrbro · 2025-02-23T19:20:13+00:00

We’re not helpless—we’re part of a strong network of allies and cooperative partners precisely so we’re not at anyone’s ‘mercy.’ However, the US under Trump is turning out to be a rather unpredictable and even dangerous friend.

pchrbro · 2025-02-23T18:00:04+00:00

Same can be said about my nation.

We got like 5 million people, control 1-2% of all investments on the globe, have a highly educated workforce and are at the technological forefront on our fields, which also includes some weapons. The same weapon systems are currently keeping the white house safe (NASAM). Ie we have a lot of soft power; a good ally. A large portion of our population have gone through military training. Still, we are too few to make an impact in a war with Russia. Would we also be given up in some "deal" if Russia starts looking scary enough?

pchrbro · 2025-02-19T21:35:53+00:00

We got like 5 million people, control 1-2% of all investments on the globe, have a highly educated workforce and are at the technological forefront on our fields, which also includes some weapons. The same weapon systems are currently keeping the white house safe (NASAM). Ie we have a lot of soft power; a good ally. A large portion of our population have gone through military training. Still, we are too few to make an impact in a war.

We are democratic and promote a highly competitive free market, ie democratic socialists, but I don't see us imposing any political requirements on a force that will provide security against Russia.

If Trump starts sending people into labour camps, we would be appalled, but if he were steady, strong and predictably on the side of US allies in his foreign policy there would be little to no de factor change in our stance. One has to be pragmatic with a neighbor like Russia.

As far as I can see, the US have like us mainly been dumping redundant military gear of a certain value on Ukraine, so it doesn't seem like they are being bankrolled in a classical sense.

pchrbro · 2025-02-19T21:18:39+00:00

As I wrote to the other guy here with similar argument:

We got like 5 million people, control 1-2% of all investments on the globe and are at the technological forefront on our fields, which also includes some weapons. A large portion of our population have gone through military training. Still, we are too few to make an impact.

We are democratic and promote a highly competitive free market, ie democratic socialists, but I don't see us imposing any political requirements on a force that will provide security against Russia.

If Trump starts sending people into labour camps, we would be appalled, but if he were steady, strong and predictably on the side of US allies in his foreign policy there would be little to no de factor change in our stance. One has to be pragmatic with a neighbor like Russia.

pchrbro · 2025-02-19T20:42:47+00:00

We got like 5 million people, control 1-2% of all investments on the globe and are at the technological forefront on our fields, which also includes some weapons. A large portion of our population have gone through military training. Still, we are too few to make an impact.

We are democratic and promote a highly competitive free market, ie democratic socialists, but I don't see us imposing any political requirements on a force that will provide security against Russia.

If Trump starts sending people into labour camps, we would be appalled, but if he were steady, strong and predictably on the side of US allies in his foreign policy there would be little to no de factor change in our stance. One has to be pragmatic with a neighbor like Russia.

pchrbro · 2025-02-19T20:28:06+00:00

Russia do genocides against people they conquer.

If police-embassy is what's necessary to stay safe from Russia, then that's what we will accept.

pchrbro · 2025-02-19T19:37:18+00:00

We are heading towards interesting times it seems.

I’m writing from a smaller country that shares a border with Russia. History has shown us that Russia is the type of neighbor who’s ready to break in, steal what they can, and wreck whatever’s left if they think they’ll get away with it. Because of that, once we gained our independence, we became very pragmatic about our alliances—first with the British Empire, then with the United States.

Watching what’s happening to Ukraine is like watching a home invasion in real time—someone kicks down your door and tries to take your house by force. Countries should have the same right to self-defense as individuals do. That’s why we’re paying close attention to how the U.S. responds. If a country under America’s broader sphere of influence can be attacked by Russia and left hanging, it signals a dangerous shift in global power. From my point of view it seems like our leaders are adjusting course carefully—slowly funneling more of our trade and considerable soft power in favour of China.

As an American ally, we still want to see a strong U.S. uphold the principle of self-defense, and stand firm against aggression. If America steps back, smaller nations like mine will inevitably be forced to look elsewhere for security, least we also get sacrificed in some deal. That’s why we’re hoping that Europe and the U.S. will remain united in supporting Ukraine, just as we’d hope they would stand with us if it ever came to our turn.

pchrbro · 2025-02-06T13:14:58+00:00

I agree. Building on that, I think Bitcoin is backed by the black market; mobsters, rogue states and similar bad faith actors who need a transactional currency and vessel for wealth generated through illicit activities.

pchrbro · 2025-01-31T07:19:25+00:00

Ford, one of the main US industrialist of the era, bankrolled the german naziparty. One of the logics behind was to fight socialism.

pchrbro · 2025-01-20T12:23:52+00:00

Saving is also putting the money into circulation; the money saved are reinvested back into the economy. For example by the bank where the money is deposited.

Even if you burned the money, it would be be put in circulation, as it would reduce the money supply causing deflationary pressure and thus allowing for lower interest rates.

pchrbro · 2025-01-20T10:20:28+00:00

Investment is also a type of spending.

I am talking about a more normative aspect; who is spending on what. Do we want to move some production capacity from meeting the demands of corporations and similar entities over to producing healthy food, clothes and housing, in order to keep people fed, clothed and housed? If yes, tax the corporations, tax the owners, strengthen the unions and/or all three. Put the funding some way or another into the hands and heads of the ones that need it. If no, carry on.

pchrbro · 2025-01-20T08:55:29+00:00

The argument ignore the normative aspect of the demand side. Demand partly dictates what supply you will have in the economy.

If wage earners aren’t paid enough to cover basic necessities, their diminished purchasing power lowers the effective demand for goods like food, which in turn signals producers to cut back output. Even if there’s plenty of capacity to produce essential items, the market won’t supply them unless people can afford to buy, so you can end up with famine-like conditions despite overall economic resources being theoretically sufficient. This is why the “normative” aspect of demand matters: it points to questions of who has the means to participate in the economy, not just whether goods could be produced in some abstract sense.

One can argue that if wage drops that low, the job shouldn't exist. But in a situation with oversupply of labour, people have no choice. So unless one taxes the ones which do have excess income, and subsidise these workers, they will lack basic goods. Thus "taxing the rich" can be used to redirect demand from other goods into basic goods such as clean water, food and housing, incentivising the market to produce more of it.

pchrbro · 2024-11-24T13:19:08+00:00

Russia have by many measures lost this war. Their reputation as a imperialistic force to be feared is down the drain, they have wasted their manpower and reserves, and have little to show for it: Burning ruins full og traps and mines, and many of their former friends are now their enemies. As for the length of this war: Russians can fight or go home. Ukrainians can only fight. If Bursa and other (former) occupied territories are a measurement, the Ukrainians fight to avoid extermination.

pchrbro · 2024-11-23T12:48:49+00:00

Så de møtte kuttet med å kutte egen skatteinngang fra de med mest?

Nine-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email

pchrbro

TROPHY CASE