What I wonder is about the second order effects. I mean, I'm pretty far from Denmark but here the talk is pretty much like an existential crisis.
Even if the US does nothing about it, seems that many people has finally realized that Europe has no allies.
This has a lot of implications regarding the Pax Americana, the US/EU financial system, Eurasia, and many others.
I don't see any positive outcome for the west in general. Europe in particular is screwed but besides short-term gains I don't think the US is going to be able to sustain anything but very fragile and transactional alliances, if any.
> Even if the US does nothing about it, seems that many people has finally realized that Europe has no allies.
Indeed. But just because EU thinks too high of themselves and is turning down their last natural allies that is the South American/Mercosur countries. So whatever happens to EU is their own fault
Europe and the EU are two different things. The EU is already having it's own credibility crisis inside the EU, and there are already heavy pushes for reform.
The conversation is completely different in Germany, Poland, Italy and Spain, for example.
The EU has enacted pretty stupid policies but I don't think the status quo was about to last a lot. Now with the Greenland issue things are about to speed up.
My guess is that, because they shaked hands with conservative leaders in Europe, the White house thinks this is going to benefit them.
I don't think this is going to be the case mid term.
What are you talking about. There's little real opposition to the EU-Mercosur trade deal. It'll be ratified this year. The EU is the largest source of foreign direct investment in Mercosur.
>I don't see any positive outcome for the west in general. Europe in particular is screwed but besides short-term gains I don't think the US is going to be able to sustain anything but very fragile and transactional alliances, if any.
Europe became the forefront of human civilization, the home of the renaissance and the industrial revolution, because of internal competition between states (as opposed to the large centralized autocracies of Asia and the Middle East). In the long term more competition will ultimately be a good thing for Europe, forcing it to stop resting on its laurels, to start innovating and growing again.
US already has access to Greenland. It has bases, they can expand if they want, and they even may be able to extract natural resources from it (don't know the current status). This is completely unnecessary from a military/resources standpoint.
From my POV trust in the US is already completely broken, and people is pretty worried.
Some of the MAGA people seem to say that that's exactly what they want, to make Europe wake up and take care of itself. Which is a good thing from my POV as Europe as an entity has been doing pretty bad decisions, and some of the european countries too (I think Trump was right about the nordstream).
Now, what I don't think americans understand is that Europe is not the memes they see in the Internet. Europe is not just a bunch of lefties shitting on the US, in fact we consume US products and services, we pour enormous amounts of money into US financial markets, US has plenty of bases here, there's a lot of intel exchange, etc.
I wonder if americans understand what pushing Europe into survival mode means. In, maybe, sooner than 20 years the Pax Americana will be completely over. US will have no allies (Who? Latin America, with only transactional ties due to shared history? Rusia, with a decaying pop and GDP closer to Italy?) and you'll fail to deter China from becoming the global power.
Because I guess nobody in the US believes China will just sit and watch, right?
If it wasn't for China, this would be the world order Dugin et al wanted. If democrats weren't right about Trump being a Putin puppet, they were pretty close.
The tablet itself has been good. The firmware support is good. The charger died, and the keyboard case is on its last legs. I had to solder the pins back on to keep it working. It's an acceptable keyboard case, but the 'a' key doesn't work super well. Still a decent product, particularly for a Linux convertable, but definitely not something I would give my dad.
I have about +2 years of experience in this field. Had a bunch of freelance experiences and I'm joining my second job next week.
I moved from my previous job partly because this blind faith in AI, "with Cursor this bug shouldn't be more than 15 minutes". I just got tired of this.
Next job is in consultancy. Don't like moving from product to consultancy, but turns out the client is on the ISP field and don't want to hear anything about AI.
This isn't what I like either. AI has it's use cases and I actually find it useful, as augmentation of my capabilities. But at least is not blind faith.
I made the career change from IT support to software. I'm already 37, and I'm wondering if I took the worst timing ever. I don't like what I'm seeing around. I don't like the interviews I had till I landed this one.
I wonder if I joined the field just when its most big enshitification push arrived. Salaries lowering, completely broken interview process, burned out seniors left and right, no pipeline to us newcomers, etc.
Not sure if this is the place I want to be at 37, but at least I have the life experience to navigate this with a bit of philosophy, because the youngsters I've known along the way are really scared.
I find it helpful to see this the way that VCs do - these projects aren't a result of asking "is this a good way to accomplish this goal?"
They're a result of looking at an idea and saying "I bet I, personally, can make money off of this."
The degree to which VCs decide the direction of human endeavor is disheartening. We have real problems to solve, and in the case of rail, a really robust set of tools and approaches that are proven to solve them.
It's all a grift for people who can't do basic math. I'm seeing heavy, low-speed electric passenger rail needs 15-30 kWh per mile. There's no way they can build out enough solar to meet that demand in the RoW for the tracks. Never mind that now you've cluttered the space that workers need to use when performing maintenance and created a safety hazard for emergency access.
At best they can use some particularly suitable embankments.
Putting solar actually near the tracks is presumably not on the cards: not only because the regulations for bolting techy shit to a railway are there for a reason, but also the vibration, the overshadowed nature of much railway, thick black grime, and difficulty in getting access for maintenance, and impediment and vulnerability to normal railway maintenance. It sounds a nightmare in both operational and capital terms.
And since the trains mostly run at 25kV (the 750V third rail systems are basically a dead end in the UK) it would probably be quite a headache to step a few dozen panels here and there up to that, even if there was a way to feed it in near the panel. So exporting to the national grid is probably more cost effective in many cases.
Then again, it's understandable that if Network Rail has to have the land anyway that it wants to get something out of it rather than it just being a net cost.
The article does a very bad job of explaining the 'why' part, but I think they're saying that the benefit is in
feeding the solar panel output to the trains without going through the (national) grid. It's presumably cheaper because the grid operator isn't taking a cut. Whether it is significantly cheaper when all the other costs are considered is another question.
FTA: “A key barrier to electrification is often the limitations of the local electricity grid – it's hard to get access to a big connection for powering your trains. "That problem has only become much, much worse," says Mr Murray.”
⇒ This moves production close to where power is consumed, removing/decreasing the need for new grid infra.
The article claims this, but the huge amount of electrified rail that already exists, and has for 50 years, suggests the problem isn't as difficult as they make it out.
Because now your manager will measure on LOCs against other engineers again and it's only software engineers worrying about complexity, maintainability, and, in summary, the health of the very creature it's going to pay your salary.
This is the new world we live in. Anyone who actually likes coding should seriously look for other venues because this industry is for other type of people now.
I use AI in my job. I went from tolerable (not doing anything fancy) to unbearable.
I'm actually looking to become a council employee with a boring job and code my own stuff, because if this is what I have to do moving forward, I rather go back to non-coding jobs.
i strongly disagree with this - if anything, using AI to code real production code in real complex codebase is MORE technical than just writing software.
Staff/Principal engineers already spend a lot more time designing systems than writing code. They care a lot about complexity, maintainability, and good architecture.
The best people I know who have been using these techniques are former CTOs, former core Kubernetes contributors, have built platforms for CRDTs at scale, and many other HIGHLY technical pursuits.
This is actually where the "myth" of the 10x engineer comes from - there do exist such people and they always could do more than the rest of us ... because they knew what to build. It's not 10K lines of code, it's _the right_ 10K lines of code. Whether using LLMs or LLVM to produce bytes the bytes produced are not the "τέχνη".
That said, I don't think it takes MORE τέχνη to use the machine, merely a distinct ἐμπειρία. That said, both ἐμπειρία and τέχνη aren't σοφία.
Can you please stop posting like this? You've done it repeatedly, it's against the site guidelines, and it's destructive of the curious conversation we're trying for here.
Edit: your account has unfortunately been breaking the site guidelines a lot in other threads as well. We ban such accounts, so if you'd please fix this, we'd appreciate it.
That’s ok Dang. I’d rather not post considering the quality of other people’s posts which claim ridiculous statements with no proof which you seem to allow or even outright misinformation. Asking for evidence is deemed site breaking? Ok. I’m not sure I’d want to be part of a community which allows so much misinformation and outright nonsense. This use to be a site where rational thoughts use to exist but doesn’t anymore and this thread and your focus on my comments seems to show otherwise. Feel free to ban me if that’s going to fix this site. I’m sure discourse will normalize and the misinformation will disappear.
Even if the US does nothing about it, seems that many people has finally realized that Europe has no allies.
This has a lot of implications regarding the Pax Americana, the US/EU financial system, Eurasia, and many others.
I don't see any positive outcome for the west in general. Europe in particular is screwed but besides short-term gains I don't think the US is going to be able to sustain anything but very fragile and transactional alliances, if any.