Personally I just wish this had legal consequences for real people, because ultimately someone makes those decisions.
Avoiding a single company might be viable, but constantly keeping track of who (and their brands) should be avoided imo is not the solution, but a bandaid fix.
The one issue, besides availability (both on the vendor side and banks offering it), is that as I understand it wero is basically just a somewhat more convenient direkt bank transfer. But does it also offer some form of buyer protection?
For many things like sending money to friends or shopping at large retailers that doesn't matter. But for buying at smaller websites that
The issue is who decides on what vote everyone gets? I assume the idea is that experts should decide? But there plenty of "experts" with qualifications that I wouldn't want to make decisions.
Taken to the extreme this would basically be Plato's philosopher king, which sounds nice in theory, but I don't see working in practice.
Equal vote might be bad, but it's the lesser evil in practice.
To throw in my unpopular opinion (not sure if it qualifies as boring or not). There should be no age requirement for voting (in that sense it's already the case that not everyone has an equal vote because children do not have one).
Idk about the production side. But as I understand it the big issue with hybrids is how the emissions look in practice (at least here in Germany).
Based on a study from Frauenhofer-Institut ( link here warning PDF+in German) emissions are fastly higher in the real world compared to what the official spec say on paper. To the tune of being up to 3x higher.
I also think at least here in Germany a lot of hybrids were bought by corporations due to better taxation. But in practice rarely get used in pure electric mode, as the users have no incentive to do so when the company gives you a fuel card.
Yeah, not even looking at the offer seems stupid. Unless maybe you think that it leads to consequences before you get the chance to voice your opinion again. I'm not sure how it was communicated in the lead up to this referendum, at what stage in the process the next one would be.
but Iceland will still need to invest heavily in national defense to realistically protect them from a belligerent America.
To me this just doesn't seem feasible for a country like Iceland. Imo there is a threshold that needs to be reached before any level of protection is achieved and imo Taiwan is basically the only small country that managed to reach this point. But what it took to get there is being the linchpin for the most important global industry.
There are so many levels of LLM involvement and once you make this distinction you actually have to devote some of your limited resources to define and enforce it. So I think it might not be strictly beneficial, but possibly also have downsides.
Where would you draw the line at which point it counts as LLM involvement? Having one run as some sort of spell/syntax checker? Doing some research (and being influenced by it) before hand coding something? Having it create a working prototype and then reimplementing it by hand? If you use code from somewhere else to solve a problem and ai use has not been disclosed for this code, do you automatically have to assume LLM usage was involved or is there plausible deniability?
I think in the end you'd have to use too many resources check it and debate where the line is drawn, when the real question is how you retain human knowledge and engagement within your community.
More supply should still lower prices, even if Trump puts tariffs on Chinese dram/nand. While there might be some quality differences in the end dram/nand still is a commodity good that is for the most part interchangeable (assuming it meets some standards).
So China would just supply everyone else leaving more capacity from other manufacturers like micron for the US.
Ich dachte der Hauptnutzen ist, dass man die Roller spontan vor Ort leiht ohne es zu planen. Und für Verleihfirmen vielleicht noch, dass sie eventuell etwas weniger fehleranfällig bzw leichter zu warten sind als Fahrräder. Diesen Einsatzzweck kann man doch gar nicht mit einem eigenen Gerät abdecken.
Wenn man gezielt herumfahren will, sollte ein (Klapp-)Fahrrad doch wesentlich sinnvoller sein.
I'm from Germany where as the article point out small solar installations are quite common e.g. on balconies, but while they are obviously vastly preferable compared to not having them, I still see them as somewhat of a sign for systematic failure.
There's just no way it makes more sense for everyone to do some small installation with maybe even some batteries, instead of doing large scale deployments where efficiency of scale drives down cost and complexity.
The solution really should have been to involve people by doing large solar parks and giving people the ability (maybe subsidized) to purchase ownership shares. And through that letting them participate in the profits and gaining mind share.
We easily have the space for it. Roughly 20% of agricultural land is used for energy crops source, which is much less efficient and also worse for biodiversity, id you let stuff grow around/under solar panels.
Just take some of e.g. 750 million hectares used to plant rapeseed for biofuels and put solar on them. Rather than trying to do lots of small custom home installations.
(all this is just based on what I've read, I have no qualifications on this topic)
My understanding is that french and British aircraft carriers differ in the way they launch planes. France uses a catapult, which requires the frame of the aircraft to be reinforced, the UK does not.
The UK also is already part of a separate program called gcap to develop their next gen fighters together with Japan and Italy. This is already well underway and work share has been decided on.
As I've already mentioned in this thread, the whole thing about the next gen programs is not just about having the aircraft at the end, but also retaining/building up the domestic industry and know-how.
Sweden might be interested to team up (although theyd probably prefer a lighter/cheaper aircraft than Germany), but my understanding is that Germany and Sweden both have similar gaps in their know-how. I think it has to do with some hot parts of the engine, which in Europe France or the UK would be the experts in. You can ofc develop them yourself from scratch, but that is costly and more importantly likely takes too long.
But the military requirements are only half the issue, the other half is building up and retaining institutional knowledge in building auch planes. Otherwise Germany could probably solve their problem easily by just buying whatever gcap ends up producing.
What I find quite fascinating is that on one hand 100 billion is a fuck ton of money, on the other hand it's like 2 quarters of profit for Google or less than what Meta is planning to spend on data centers in 2026 (they also spend like 70billion on the Meta verse). I guess money wasn't the direct issue right now, but France (a large nation) will have trouble with funding when they decide to do it by themselves
But yes, it should be clear to everyone that this is what they are working towards. There is nothing that even hints at them working towards any other solution.
I think with the German TÜV numbers it is not quite as clear cut.
My understanding is that telsa unlike other manufacturers doesn't require regular inspections to keep warranties. So it might just be that other brands have just as many faults, but they get caught and fixed during those regular inspections, rather than at the official TÜV. Which wouldn't show up in that dataset.
I haven't seen any studies accounting for that discrepancy, but I'd be curious to see whether the higher failure rate persists after accounting for that.
Haben wir das angekündigt, ist irgendwie an mir vorbeigezogen.
Wenn wir aber tatsächlich selbst Nuklearwaffen besitzen wollen, dann könnten wir eventuell entweder einfach Material von den Franzosen oder vllt Engländern beziehen (ich gehe mal davon aus, dass man das nicht all zu oft ersetzen muss) oder alternativ haben wir immernoch den Forschungsreaktor in Garching.
Der hat witziger Weise anscheinend sogar aktuell schon waffenfähiges Uran siehe hier
Naja, umgekehrt stehen Ehepartner aber auch füreinander in schlechten Situationen ein. Solange einer von beiden gut verdient kann der andere keine Sozialleistungen beziehen und wenn einer mal im Alter ins Heim muss, dann wird denke ich Mal auch das gesamte gemeinsame Vermögen dafür berücksichtigt.
Ich wäre durchaus daran interessiert, ob jemand Mal eine Kosten/Nutzen Rechnung für die Ehe aus gesellschaftlicher Sicht durchgerechnet hat. So eindeutig klar ist es mir nämlich nicht, dass wir davon profitieren, wenn es weniger Vorteile und dadurch vermutlich als Konsequenz auch weniger Ehen gibt.
Personally I just wish this had legal consequences for real people, because ultimately someone makes those decisions.
Avoiding a single company might be viable, but constantly keeping track of who (and their brands) should be avoided imo is not the solution, but a bandaid fix.
That's great to hear, thanks for the link.
The one issue, besides availability (both on the vendor side and banks offering it), is that as I understand it wero is basically just a somewhat more convenient direkt bank transfer. But does it also offer some form of buyer protection?
For many things like sending money to friends or shopping at large retailers that doesn't matter. But for buying at smaller websites that
The issue is who decides on what vote everyone gets? I assume the idea is that experts should decide? But there plenty of "experts" with qualifications that I wouldn't want to make decisions.
Taken to the extreme this would basically be Plato's philosopher king, which sounds nice in theory, but I don't see working in practice.
Equal vote might be bad, but it's the lesser evil in practice.
To throw in my unpopular opinion (not sure if it qualifies as boring or not). There should be no age requirement for voting (in that sense it's already the case that not everyone has an equal vote because children do not have one).
Idk about the production side. But as I understand it the big issue with hybrids is how the emissions look in practice (at least here in Germany).
Based on a study from Frauenhofer-Institut ( link here warning PDF+in German) emissions are fastly higher in the real world compared to what the official spec say on paper. To the tune of being up to 3x higher.
I also think at least here in Germany a lot of hybrids were bought by corporations due to better taxation. But in practice rarely get used in pure electric mode, as the users have no incentive to do so when the company gives you a fuel card.
Same here. I'll see it eventually and will probably enjoy it, but for me it's not a movie I need to see in the cinema.
Yeah, not even looking at the offer seems stupid. Unless maybe you think that it leads to consequences before you get the chance to voice your opinion again. I'm not sure how it was communicated in the lead up to this referendum, at what stage in the process the next one would be.
To me this just doesn't seem feasible for a country like Iceland. Imo there is a threshold that needs to be reached before any level of protection is achieved and imo Taiwan is basically the only small country that managed to reach this point. But what it took to get there is being the linchpin for the most important global industry.
There are so many levels of LLM involvement and once you make this distinction you actually have to devote some of your limited resources to define and enforce it. So I think it might not be strictly beneficial, but possibly also have downsides.
Where would you draw the line at which point it counts as LLM involvement? Having one run as some sort of spell/syntax checker? Doing some research (and being influenced by it) before hand coding something? Having it create a working prototype and then reimplementing it by hand? If you use code from somewhere else to solve a problem and ai use has not been disclosed for this code, do you automatically have to assume LLM usage was involved or is there plausible deniability?
I think in the end you'd have to use too many resources check it and debate where the line is drawn, when the real question is how you retain human knowledge and engagement within your community.
More supply should still lower prices, even if Trump puts tariffs on Chinese dram/nand. While there might be some quality differences in the end dram/nand still is a commodity good that is for the most part interchangeable (assuming it meets some standards).
So China would just supply everyone else leaving more capacity from other manufacturers like micron for the US.
Ich dachte der Hauptnutzen ist, dass man die Roller spontan vor Ort leiht ohne es zu planen. Und für Verleihfirmen vielleicht noch, dass sie eventuell etwas weniger fehleranfällig bzw leichter zu warten sind als Fahrräder. Diesen Einsatzzweck kann man doch gar nicht mit einem eigenen Gerät abdecken.
Wenn man gezielt herumfahren will, sollte ein (Klapp-)Fahrrad doch wesentlich sinnvoller sein.
Also seine vorherige Beschäftigung an Universitäten etc zu gehen und da Vorträge zu halten fand ich definitiv sympathischer.
Neben seinen Kontakten kann ich mir aber bei Habeck zumindest vorstellen, dass er auch inhaltlich durchaus für so ein Unternehmen interessant ist.
I'm from Germany where as the article point out small solar installations are quite common e.g. on balconies, but while they are obviously vastly preferable compared to not having them, I still see them as somewhat of a sign for systematic failure.
There's just no way it makes more sense for everyone to do some small installation with maybe even some batteries, instead of doing large scale deployments where efficiency of scale drives down cost and complexity.
The solution really should have been to involve people by doing large solar parks and giving people the ability (maybe subsidized) to purchase ownership shares. And through that letting them participate in the profits and gaining mind share.
We easily have the space for it. Roughly 20% of agricultural land is used for energy crops source, which is much less efficient and also worse for biodiversity, id you let stuff grow around/under solar panels.
Just take some of e.g. 750 million hectares used to plant rapeseed for biofuels and put solar on them. Rather than trying to do lots of small custom home installations.
(all this is just based on what I've read, I have no qualifications on this topic)
My understanding is that french and British aircraft carriers differ in the way they launch planes. France uses a catapult, which requires the frame of the aircraft to be reinforced, the UK does not.
The UK also is already part of a separate program called gcap to develop their next gen fighters together with Japan and Italy. This is already well underway and work share has been decided on.
As I've already mentioned in this thread, the whole thing about the next gen programs is not just about having the aircraft at the end, but also retaining/building up the domestic industry and know-how.
Sweden might be interested to team up (although theyd probably prefer a lighter/cheaper aircraft than Germany), but my understanding is that Germany and Sweden both have similar gaps in their know-how. I think it has to do with some hot parts of the engine, which in Europe France or the UK would be the experts in. You can ofc develop them yourself from scratch, but that is costly and more importantly likely takes too long.
But the military requirements are only half the issue, the other half is building up and retaining institutional knowledge in building auch planes. Otherwise Germany could probably solve their problem easily by just buying whatever gcap ends up producing.
What I find quite fascinating is that on one hand 100 billion is a fuck ton of money, on the other hand it's like 2 quarters of profit for Google or less than what Meta is planning to spend on data centers in 2026 (they also spend like 70billion on the Meta verse). I guess money wasn't the direct issue right now, but France (a large nation) will have trouble with funding when they decide to do it by themselves
salami tactics. Not really a new thing.
But yes, it should be clear to everyone that this is what they are working towards. There is nothing that even hints at them working towards any other solution.
I think with the German TÜV numbers it is not quite as clear cut.
My understanding is that telsa unlike other manufacturers doesn't require regular inspections to keep warranties. So it might just be that other brands have just as many faults, but they get caught and fixed during those regular inspections, rather than at the official TÜV. Which wouldn't show up in that dataset.
I haven't seen any studies accounting for that discrepancy, but I'd be curious to see whether the higher failure rate persists after accounting for that.
Haben wir das angekündigt, ist irgendwie an mir vorbeigezogen. Wenn wir aber tatsächlich selbst Nuklearwaffen besitzen wollen, dann könnten wir eventuell entweder einfach Material von den Franzosen oder vllt Engländern beziehen (ich gehe mal davon aus, dass man das nicht all zu oft ersetzen muss) oder alternativ haben wir immernoch den Forschungsreaktor in Garching.
Der hat witziger Weise anscheinend sogar aktuell schon waffenfähiges Uran siehe hier
Naja, umgekehrt stehen Ehepartner aber auch füreinander in schlechten Situationen ein. Solange einer von beiden gut verdient kann der andere keine Sozialleistungen beziehen und wenn einer mal im Alter ins Heim muss, dann wird denke ich Mal auch das gesamte gemeinsame Vermögen dafür berücksichtigt.
Ich wäre durchaus daran interessiert, ob jemand Mal eine Kosten/Nutzen Rechnung für die Ehe aus gesellschaftlicher Sicht durchgerechnet hat. So eindeutig klar ist es mir nämlich nicht, dass wir davon profitieren, wenn es weniger Vorteile und dadurch vermutlich als Konsequenz auch weniger Ehen gibt.