freeman

You do not need to proclaim any zone to prepare for an enemy attack. The only need use of claiming an ADIZ is to propagandize that you are being 'violated' by perfectly legal behavior.

FIR is an ICAO concept relating to civil aviation. Military operations do not have to follow ICAO rules and FIR procedures, never mind request permission to enter a FIR zone in international airspace.

Even in regards to civilian aviation FIR airspace is not subject to the whims of the nation administering it (unless the airspace is also in their territorial airspace). Airlines can be banned for territorial airspaces not FIRs.

So no Incheon FIR is not internationally recognized as South Korea airspace.

Nor was the KADIZ set up to support Inceon FIR it was setup during the Korean war by USAF.

Having said that pretending to have an ADIZ is not illegal in itself as long as you do not take illegal actions in support of it. You can track planes via radar,ask them to identify themselves (they can ignore you) and even fly up to them in international airspace.

Though shooting even warning shots as they claimed they did in 2019 would be an illegal act of agression.

There is no such thing as Air Defence (Idetification) Zones in international law. Countries claiming to have one are trying to appropriate international airspace arbitrarily.

From a quick look at wikipedia S. Korea's ADIZ seems to extend much much further than 12nmi from any land (incl. islands). It also obviously extends over N. Korea land which is obviously territory of N. Korea.

I’m not American, can someone explain why Biden does this when his “one job” for 2024 is to not look like a fash?

Is it though? Americans do not really care about foreigners getting killed. A lot are actually in favor of Israel killing people and/or Muslims being killed in general. It's not a given he will lose more votes than he will gain from 'moderate' Republicans. After all Democrat voters will be whipped into line with the 'but Trump/lesser evil' argument. This' sub's mod has smeared himself up in shit and is going hard at it.

Sovereignty over territory Apple chose to conduct business in.

Sovereignty

And I want a law making you pay me 500$ for reading your posts.

Copyright law already extends beyond what society finds reasonable. It's routinely broken by normal people without them even thinking about it. It's even broken by those vested in it both corporations and individual artists.

Finally you are not getting the copyright law you want ( nor should you, you a minority, a special interest ), big corps are. They might be 'content' corps or tech or both but they certainly won't make a law to benefit either society as a whole or you as a small artist.

Nowhere did I insinuate you were trying to mislead me specifically. That's also misleading.

Have a good night.

'Bet' all you want, you are still wrong.

Sorting vast amounts of data is already an issue for intel agencies that theoretically llms could solve. However decrypting is magnitudes harder and more expensive. You can't use llms to decide which data to keep for decrypting since.. you don't have language data for the llms to process. You will have to use tools working on metadata (sender and receiver, method used etc).

There's also no reason for intelligence services to train AI on your decrypted messages, it won't help them decrypt other messages faster, in fact it will take away resources from decryption.

Because it's linked as a source in the article when the shootings are mentioned.

But indeed it is clear even from just the Guardian article that the 37th and 38th mass shootings of this year broke the record of 36 mass shootings. All this before any stabbing or overall mass killing is mentioned.

None of the articles are misleading, your comments are, I guess purposely.

Nope, there are 38 mass shootings which are a record for mass shootings. Additionally the guardian mentions mass stabbings, usually a pro-gun argument.

The WP article linked in the Guardian article mentions 38 mass shootings and has no reference to stabbings. In the infographic for every incident it mentions a shooter specifically, not a perpetrator or attacker.

Your comment is misleading, not the article.

The issue is that the UK is too big both population and economy wise to be content with following EU's laws unquestionably.

They already complained about it when it was not actually happening so imagine the outrage this time around.