Polyembryony is the reverse of what you think: one embryo is a result of pollination and all the others are clones. The sexual reproduction embryo is often less vigorous and sometimes doesn't develop at all. It makes it easy to reproduce "true" plants, but also makes it difficult to produce hybrids for some species.

And both have a similarly executive-centric form of government where the president and the majority party hold a disproportionate amount of power. Although the US is even worse than France on this regard as far as I know.

I think it makes sense that both are categorised as flawed.

A more accurate, 3D mapped street view could probably allow GPS-less geolocation and could also help autonomous vehicles as they would get more information than what they can immediately see.

I could see well-mapped street view with good services built around it, and maybe a way to pay for and schedule regular updates, being used for towns to monitor public space long term too.

I think many things could be built on a better street view, but I also don't want Google to get yet another de facto monopoly in a new domain.

This already exists. If my phone fails to get a good GPS signal Google Maps prompts me to turn the camera on and spin around in a circle. I would also be unsurprised to learn Waymo uses Street View

>could also help autonomous vehicles as they would get more information than what they can immediately see.

Waymo and others already do this, that's why they can only operate in mapped areas.

Given that Waymo is a google company, they almost certainly started with street view data.

> ethically coherent with American values

Do you mean that VPN will blur the nipples when you watch pictures of classical paintings through it?

> Do you mean that VPN will blur the nipples when you watch pictures of classical paintings through it?

No, it means they will send a SWAT team to your house if you use it to download a movie.

These days what people receive of the US influence is mostly interference in politics to favour the far-right, military threats and economic war through tariffs. As well as just random verbal attacks on local politicians on local matters.

I'm sure there is a positive side to the US influence, but it's well hidden and they definitely don't advertise it.

Catshark maybe, although I don't know if that species in particular is old enough.

If part of it is sold, isn't it better than if it had all been destroyed? It's literally what that law is for.

Define what you mean by "better". Putting them on a giant CO2-burning ship to transport around the world to find every last person who wants a $1 shirt is much more harmful to the environment than just throwing it into a hole in the ground and making another one.

Given how absurdly efficient shipping stuff in container ships is, I don't believe its actually worse. Specially if the company can just save money by being slightly more conservative in terms of how much they manufacture in the first place.

Sure, let's conveniently not count the horrifically-polluting trucks in <3rd world country with zero environmental regulations> to distribute them across the interior.

You're acting like companies enjoy flushing money down the toilet by making extra stuff. They are already making what they believe are the optimal number of products they believe they can sell. You think EU bureaucrats know their business better than they do?

The point is to change what companies believe is the optimal number of products. Right now companies produce what they expect to sell, with errors in both directions being valued equally. In the future they will have to produce only what they are certain they can sell.

And other cloths they could buy don't use trucks?

The point is increasing the cost of over-production. Its not about the EU knowing better, but imposing a higher price for waste. Not sure how you are confused about that.

The additional shipments aren't going to drastically go up over a few more companies throwing second hand clothing on ships. Large crate ships are relatively efficient for what they tow.

As basic napkin math, if there's 1000 cargo ships moving in and out of the EU in a year, and this law adds 10 more. That's 1% increase. It's a bigger 1%, but I wouldn't be surprised if the emissions are less than the 9% of discarded clothes talked about in the article.

I'm going to speculate that it won't "add" ships at all

As you say, ships are moving in and out of the EU each year - the question is, how many have "back loads" - if some percentage of the ships leave Europe empty to return to Asia for more manufactured goods, then it seems very likely that they can have the containers of unwanted clothes as part of the trip.

Oh cool, so I can fly commercial all I want at zero marginal CO2 emissions just because they don't have to build an extra plane just for me? I can burn that jet fuel and not feel bad because they were going to burn that gallon of fuel anyway?

Some of these arguments are so silly that I'm starting to understand why the EU thinks regulations are a free lunch to improve the environment with no costs whatsoever.

>Oh cool, so I can fly commercial all I want at zero marginal CO2 emissions just because they don't have to build an extra plane just for me?

If they would have flown the plane there anyway with an empty seat, your added CO2 is negligible yes.

The analogy doesn't hold.

Airlines adjust capacity to demand — empty seats represent foregone revenue and future flights get cancelled or downsized.

Cargo ships don't work that way. A container ship returns to Asia whether it's carrying 1000 containers or 5000. The marginal emissions of an additional backload container are genuinely close to zero, not as a rhetorical trick but as a structural feature of how bulk shipping economics work.

> why should the EU regulate the design of a website?

There are laws regulating many things that could be considered "design", for example misleading packaging, mandatory information on some categories of ads, cigarette packaging, container sizes, accessibility requirements, etc.

I would say regulating against addictive design (infinite scrolling is not banned per se, it just makes for a catchy headline) is well within what laws are meant for.

Interesting, my two ISPs (one in Belgium, one in France, not business ISPs) hand out fixed /48 blocks to every customer. As far as I know, that's what RIPE recommends, they actively discourage from assigning longer prefixes than /56.

The modems they provide handle it without needing anything special from the customers. The devices get IPv6 addresses from this prefix, and are firewalled by default. It's pretty simple so I'm not sure what could go wrong there.

Honestly it's not free but it's really not that expensive. With RIPE it's about 75€ per year for the ASN and being multihomed is not really a problem, there are multiple services that will let you announce through them for free or very cheap. You don't have volume minimums.

I do agree it should be simpler, but it is accessible to individuals today.