Some Countries Exist Only on Paper on HackerTube: recommended by 1 Hacker News commenter across 1 month, 2016–2020.
explainer · evergreen
A short CGP Grey explainer about how countries are defined, why recognition by others matters, and the oddities of places like Taiwan and Vatican City. It shows that statehood is partly a matter of diplomacy rather than fact.
Cited in threads on borders, Taiwan's status and how many countries exist, as a quick explanation of why recognition is political.
“You might find this video clip interesting”
4 Hacker News comments link this video. Each one links back to its thread.
Officially, many countries and businesses agree that Taiwan isn't a country, while continuing in practice to do everything that only makes sense if Taiwan is in fact a country. This is an old game that fools no one. I wouldn't fuss about the name, we all know what's really going on, and the name game probably saves millions of lives. You might find this video clip interesting: ▶ this video
in “Why No HTTPS?” · View on HN
There are 193 countries (footnote[0]), so that might mean 193 app stores, but then some countries might delegate the power to require their own app store to their own regions/"states". 0: ▶ this video
in “Modi government to set up app store alternative to Google Play, Apple App Store” · View on HN
It says it only applies to the People's Republic of China, and in the notes above it's only because of the laws of the People's Republic of China. In all practical senses Taiwan is a separate country, but there are reasons not to admit it: ▶ this video
in “HashiCorp forbids its software being used in China” · View on HN
> The government owns all land until it is transferred/sold to a private owner. That's not a new thing: that precedent goes back to Day 1 of the United States, and maybe further I think you are talking about the fluidity of borders and lands worldwide. In reality, country borders are based on if land can be defended from other claimants ( ▶ this video ). This is the final arbitration, even after exploring existing treaties (which arent always followed, [link] ). The idea that the US federal government owns land until it's disseminated is one of those american myths that the US Govt tries REALLY hard to let alone, despite most federal lands being originally acquired by fiat and in the last 200 years by eminent domain (sometimes a front for private parties like the railway barons). Almost any private vs federal case can raise issues that can be elevated to the supreme court where the USG has a lot more to lose, regardless of the outcome. So they make lots of small steps, wisely. When they run into a case, even if they lose, the USG will simply work around the small setback.
in “The Great Republican Land Heist” · View on HN