Version 2 of Microdot incorporates feedback received from users of earlier releases, and attempts to improve and correct some design decisions that have proven to be problematic.
For this reason most applications built for earlier versions will need to be updated to work correctly with Microdot 2. The Migration Guide describes the backwards incompatible changes that were made.
Although it has a core section that does run underground through tube-like tunnels, it isn't classified as a tube line :) So isn't part of the "London Underground"
> The US-UK base will remain on Diego Garcia – a key factor enabling the deal to go forward at a time of growing geopolitical rivalries in the region between Western countries, India, and China.
So nothing really changes lol. Just a couple of paperwork remarks
If Diego Garcia remains as UK-sovereign land, then since different laws (etc) apply it's likely ISO would keep the IO code for it.
If Mauritius keeps the islands they gain with a different status (tax, immigration and so on) compared to the rest of Mauritius, then a code might be needed for that — but Mauritius probably won't be keen on "IO".
If the whole lot becomes 'ordinary Mauritius' then the code is no longer needed and will be removed.
A crime against humanity begins to get fixed. Chagosians will finally be allowed to go back to their homes. Mauritius will get paid a rent for the lease of the Diego Garcia base from the US.
Also, Mauritius is a signatory of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, and thus no nuclear weapons are allowed within its territory. TBD if there will be a special agreement allowing special sovereignty for the US/UK, which might allow the US to station nuclear weapons there (which it probably currently does).
So there's definitely change. The UK and US finally accepted their crime, which is extremely rare. Genuinely, are there other examples of them suffering consequences (even if their consequences are a return to the status quo, ish), for other of their violations of international law and/or crimes against humanity? None come to mind.
> Chagosians will finally be allowed to go back to their homes.
This is a reminder that these islands were uninhabited prior to European discovery.
It is true that they imported ... basically slaves ... from/via semi-nearby islands to work on it, but it's not like it was some ancestral island to them. When the work stopped, they were returned to the islands their ancestors came from (or at least via).
(This case is somewhat different than the also-originally-uninhabited Falkland Islands, where most people living there were always of European descent).
They still spent a few centuries there, similar to the Falkland islanders. Descent is irrelevant - a group of people has been living in a previously uninhabited place for a few centuries, it's their home.
And they weren't "returned", they were expelled from their homes and dumped somewhere else with no assistance.
> might allow the US to station nuclear weapons there (which it probably currently does)
It's a bit more than probable - being one of the very few places in the world where nuclear submarines can dock. It's also extremely unlikely to change; even if no specific verbiage is in the treaty, US/UK will likely continue to do as they please; Mauritius will simply look the other way in exchange for money and protection. Realpolitik is a thing.
Protection is not just about military matters - it's about relationships. Mauritius will likely want to push other stuff at the UN level, bid for money from international bodies, etc etc... US help in those matters will be valuable.
> Let’s say your company pays for 215 software products that cost us $420,000 a year to own and use. Nobody would object to somebody looking at that list of software finding redundancies and canceling those licenses.
That's simply not true. Big companies have special vendor management departments, their incentives are literally built around cost optimizations. Smaller startups have CEO looking at their billing and complaining about "why do we pay so much to vendor X?", check the most recent rant by DHH on Datadog:
