Since it's already in use for decades with pacemakers i don't think that the radiation is that hard to stop, no need for inches of lead.

And i could have said that it's not a completely novel technology, i used "commercial" in the sense that it's apparently destined for the general public instead of specialised fields, the wiki article says that :

We'll have to see the price before finding such batteries in the supermarket though.

As for reliability, the articles say that another advantage is that it doesn't ignite nor explode, but i suppose that something could happen if you drill through it.

SABC News as well(, not western channels though) : https://youtube.com/@sabcdigitalnews?si=NJVpLshupTA-SkI-

Quite literally apparently, weird : https://twitter.com/dwnews/status/1744900071261458617

And this comment isn't going to be loved, but if they don't want more immigration for w/e reason then they should be allowed to do so.
The nuances are that this desire is artificially built by billionaires who (pretend to )believe that immigration is a more important problem than socio-economic conditions, that everything will be better without immigrants, that our culture(, who has already been destroyed and replaced by a(n americanised) nothingness(, i don't like the modern culture, those who died centuries ago are more interesting than our living idols,) is in danger since their children supposedly don't want to be french/italian/..(, which is apparently incompatible with a dual nationality/culture, you're a better french/italian/.. citizen if you're virtuous, wearing or not a veil/turban/.. isn't going to destroy whatever our culture became, since school the rich/privileged doesn't hang out with the poor, and if other cultures are obviously less virtuous then 'the proximity of our example'/'our contacts' should be enough to let them raise the issue, there's a set of rules that could enable countries to be (almost )as diverse as they want without fearing for their liberty/security, and i hate that we(sterners) know that it's possible, we're not trying to make this world even better(, we're still young hopefully), otherwise we would share a plan/vision and be excited about this utopia), and that we shouldn't help "poor"(impoverished/exploited) countries, just prevent them to seek a better life instead of helping each other to reach an equal standard of living, etc. If immigration was a cultural problem they would try to revive the extinct culture of our past, beginning with greco-roman authors, i don't know what is the french/italian/.. culture they're speaking of, it has disappeared many decades ago, we're euro-american now and that doesn't mean much(, i.m.o.), french poets or painters are dead, if it's movies nowadays then we're not present, same for the internet, getting rid of exploited immigrants ready to give up their life for a future they deserve more than us won't change that.
We'd need more diversity/'french exceptionalism' to have an identity.

Unrelated thought : It is said that with rising inequalities there will be more investments and that this wealth will benefit everyone else, it's inefficient for enterprises because of inequal wages and other money-pocketing practices that would be considered corruption in a state-owned enterprise, but it's even more obvious when these investments are made outside of the company : investments in housing raise the rent and make it more&more out of reach to become an owner ; investments in actions raise the dividends and make it more&more out of reach to gain back the full control of the direction, ... That rents are representing an increasing part of our salary, or dividends an increasing part of the companies' profits(, despite increasing wage inequalities), shouldn't be suprising.

👍

The u.s.a. was already condemned in the case of Nicaragua and nothing changed and nobody knows that, in the very improbable offchance that Israel was condemned, they would just act like Russia when the International Court of Justice ordered them to leave Ukraine.
Let's say that our medias talk about this improbable success and, even more improbable, support the ICJ and condemn Israel, everyone would just forget a month later. Sure, there's nothing to lose by trying, but not much to gain either, it's not the beginning of an effective solution, it'll be the exact same shit as before.
And the ICJ wouldn't even need to be considered the bad guy, the contradiction wouldn't raise an eyebrow, but let's say i'm wrong, have an hope in this if you want.

edit : That's an exaggeration, those who hate Israel won't forget such judgment and would remind us when they got the chance, that's the difference i'm seeing, so you're right to say that it's not nothing to be able to label them officially as genocidal, it'd add a new argument/insult of choice.

That's ~two every three years :

Somalia needs some support with Somaliland, and https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Biden-Approves-Redeployment-of-US-Troops-to-Somalia-20220517-0003.html

Jamaica doesn't give any certainty either : https://globalvoices.org/2023/10/30/jamaicans-express-disappointment-over-their-countrys-no-show-un-gaza-vote/

And i don't think Brazil would want to expose themselves as much as South Africa did(, nor China for that matter), more to lose than to gain, that's justice. Bolivia probably only supported the case because Luis Arce has forbidden Evo Morales from being reelected and is trying to show that ~'he's not a traitor to the movement' despite that.
Let's say that they have a chance if you want though, it doesn't matter because that's not what would make a change, do they only have the option of a full-scale war with unknown consequences to do what's right ? We're just supposed to watch and then it'll be as if nothing ever happened, ok.

They were already finally accepted by Iraq, Iran, and everyone else more than 20 years ago, but instead of giving back the illegally occupied territories to the palestinians they considered that such proposal was dishonest and would come back to bite them, that finally being recognised for the first time since 1948 wasn't worth it. If even such proposal is rejected then (pro-)palestinians aren't left with any other choice than fighting them, they unequivocally refused the most reasonable peace offer, because they believe that they're strong enough to give up on impartiality(, still a unilateral gain for them and a unilateral loss for palestinians/arabs). They could have been recognised but refused. Here.

https://twitter.com/SamaanAshrawi/status/1742644725469909284

If the evidence was fabricated or spun in order to try and smear them for being pro-Palestine, then that’s a different story.

Manipulations aren't always easy to prove, but it's not the case here.
This article cites that tweet as the first accusation, we'll both agree that there's nothing serious here.
The other news articles are written by journalists who don't have time for a proper investigation, as is usual in our modern times, instead of losing a day or a week on a piece they gather the different existing claims and begin the next article(, quicker&cheaper&'easier to read').
And even if the examples were a hundred times more numerous she's only borrowing turns of phrases, not acting as if the ideas originated from her, researchers are synthetizing much more than creating anyway, her thesis very likely added something new if it was accepted, but she probably also gave the state of the art of the subject she would end up teaching, borrowing turns of phrases should never be considered as shocking, even if she recognised herself that she should have used quotation marks here as she did in all the other cases(, and would have obtained the exact same consideration for her thesis(/theses), who already contain hundreds of citations anyway).
In my opinion, accusations of plagiarism should start when the original creator end up losing money, but she didn't gain anything by forgetting some quotation marks(, even if it amount to one quotation mark unused for every ten used, which is far from being the case here), it's politically motivated and kinda sad that nobody is surprised anymore.
B.t.w., her thesis defended the oppressed, not the powerful, it counts.

(edit : i'm glad that she modified her thesis/theses afterwards to cite the authors she took her turns of phrases from though because that's what should be done, especially if she never cited these papers once(, unlikely))

I haven't checked, but the accusations seems to have really started after the 5th of December, no ?

A majority of the links are from the u.n.(, o.c.h.a. included,) though(, but yep, some of them are from twitter or newspapers and could eventually 'have been directly replaced by an archive link'/'be deleted afterwards').

Such accusations appeared after the hearings a.f.a.i.k., and i don't much except this paragraph included in the article refuting the accusations :