Do you have any good examples of tech that was immediately embraced without any prior examples or failures to monetize? I'm having trouble thinking of any.
DVD, then. Although that's sort of cheating since it's such a natural evolution from CDs -- it was clearly better than VHS and it didn't take any convincing for people to adopt them.
(you'll probably point to DIVX but that was an experiment with a terrible business model, not a technological failure)
The same link shows that a video was also put on his CD in the 70's!
> Their efforts led to a 20-minute video disc in 1973.
> In 1974 Digital Recording Corporation announced ... the first device to digitize a color image, at a Chicago trade show. The response from large potential investors was rather cool.
And, there's LaserDisc, of course (although analog, unlike the digital disk in the above), which was somewhat of a flop (the ridiculous dimensions being part of the cause).
Tangentially related, BlueRay was more about just waiting for a blue led to be invented, than some new disc tech! [1]
I feel like you're moving the goalposts slightly: Yes, all technology involves prototypes, development, gradual refinement to something production-worthy and offered for sale.
LaserDisc is an interesting case: is it failed proto-DVD, or its own separate thing? (analog, more like an LP than CDs or DVDs)
Not all technological innovations involves a failed attempt at commercialization. Microsoft really did try (and fail) to sell tablet devices with WindowsXP, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Tablet_PC it wasn't just a prototype that they experimented with and then shelved until it could be refined later.
Illegal? Probably no, but treason certainly is. But since he is an extremely visible politician and former chancellor, ties should be investigated thoroughly, and they are not even hidden. He is openly pro-russian even 4 years into brutal war which russia repeatedly declared on all western Europe, including Germany (as in 'we will raise your cities in nuclear holocaust' to quote them).
Nobody actually pro-democratic or sane is getting such generous 'donations', these don't come for free, in russia this is not private matter but fully state controlled and orchestrated.
If you can't connect 2 and 2 form above and publicly available info and see no problem there, I guess its pretty obvious where you stand on topic of russia - vs - western democratic world war currently happening. An attempt to make this 'just another war this is happening everywhere all the time' ain't true if you live in Europe, this is our existential threat and most folks here realize that very well.
Treason is illegal, but you have failed to show a real connection. For the one you implied, your own answer is "it's not illegal". Which leads you to a leap of faith and adding 2 and 2, whatever that means, including making an emotional plea about a devastating war to justify lack of any real evidence. Sorry but no. Tony Blair is an advisor to about a dozen dictatorships, does that make him a traitor? I guess not since he is not an advisor to Russia. Weak sauce.
The FxTec Pro 1 is the closest I've found these days; it has a slied-out keyboard and an unlocked bootloader so you can run LineageOS or Ubuntu Touch (PMOS support seems spotty).
The keyboard isn't as nice as those on phones from ~2010; it's a bit too big for the thumbs to really fly and sliding it in & out is not as effortless as it should be, but nless you count Unihertz's blackberry-likes, there's really nothing else around that comes close!
> The comment is just asking for evidence. I am curious too.
Given "before 2006" includes the entire history of Soviet espionage, that's kinda like demanding evidence that the sun rises in the East. It's very obvious that Soviet espionage would have supported far-left groups in the West, so if you want evidence you should probably do your own research.
Now the post-Soviet period in that range, 1991-2005, is a different question.
That's kinda what i was going to. I had the impression that post soviet russia was much more geopolitical - support anyone destabilizing west. That included often completely contradictory support.
Russia != Soviet Union, even though Russia was the Soviet political-administrative center, contemporary Russia Federation is very different to the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic.
Russia was also communist in Soviet times, and it's not like the slate was completely wiped clean when the Soviet Union fell. IIRC the Russian Federation also is officially the successor state to the Soviet Union, and took on its treaty obligations, etc.
This is the conclusion of the article (and presumably the researchers) but I don't think it necessarily follows.
It seems to me equally plausible that one group were more interested in the craft of an accurate depiction, while the other was more interested in the arrangement of a pleasing aesthetic - both could be considered "solutions" to the given task.
I wonder how many of these will survive the bursting tech bubble?