NoLinkToMe

Could you also add your thoughts on whether you think a B1 level is a sensible requirement for permanent residence in any country?

Because that's what the post seems to boil down to, but you haven't opined on it (other than refusing to learn B1, which implies the answer somewhat).

B1 by the way is considered doable for a consistent parttime learner in 9 months, and 1-2 years for someone doing weekend studying. That's an average.

For a studious family with higher educational background making 200k a year (this is significantly above average in Germany), you've got both the IQ and the capital for tutoring to do better than average.

Seems like a sensible, useful, necessary and practical bar to set for permanent residence, to me.

There's some people that say having no airconditioning, no dishwasher, no elevator, no computer, no smartphone isn't as bad as it sounds.

And they're completely right, for them. And completely wrong, for others.

I'll never claim that it's not enough for you. And I agree also that 80% of anyone's trips can be done on just about any EV, even an old Zoe. The statistics are very clear on that, 80% of trips are short.

But you won't sell to the majority with that limitation. Just like 80% of the time my house has just 2 people in it (me and my gf), but if there was a local law that on homes in my street I could not have more than 2 people in the house (like visiting friends and family), I wouldn't have bought it. Because I don't buy it for '80% of the time', I buy it for 100% of the time.

The same goes for cars. People buy 5 seater cars even though the average car has 1.5 persons in it, for this very reason. Only 1% to 2% of cars have 2 seats, even though this is more than necessary for the average occupation in a car.

Exactly this, he should've just fixed this, or not written an article about it.

After the 'sensorium effect' (he should've used ancient greek for a +10 bonus to archaic intellectual points), he describes the 'knowledge-doing gap'. i.e. the AI reasons it needs to build X, logs this for 110 turns in a row, but doesn't do it. It doesn't actually specify why not, and whether it is again a limitation of his MCP implementation. If the AI articulates it must do it like the author says, but decides not to, either it doesn't think it must do it, or it does think it must but somehow can't technically execute its own decisions, it can't be anything else.

In fact in the context of 'advising the UK government', this 'knowledge-doing gap' I assume is a technical limitation, is entirely moot. For the cost of 0.00001% of the UK's government you could just hire a human being to execute that which the AI articulates. I'm curious what the results would be if he just did a manual execution of the AI's articulated actions would be.

The fact he doesn't go in to this but just keeps repeating examples of this makes it a pointless article.

Quite annoying to have to read a paragraph of text next to a moving image. I right-clicked every GIF and turned off 'loop'.

Beyond that reading an AI piece just feels like a waste of time. The text goes on and on without making a point, or getting to an actual learning. It just delineates the AI's limitations, doesn't go into whether these can be fixed, are innate, or what conclusions you can draw from it, over and over with example after example but no point.

Mostly it seems to keep repeating that the AI has the correct analysis but just doesn't execute. The AI knows to build X and logs this in each of its turns, yet doesn't build it. It's like there's some API connection missing between analysis and execution, and turns this into a 10 page article.

The article ends with some weird question to the AI asking if it enjoys the games, and you get some quasi-scifi mumbo jumbo answer back that looks very profound to say my mom, but is just silly to post if you know what the LLM is doing: predicting the next word. Honestly this is a poor article and I wish it wasn't posted.

I thought it was quite the opposite, too easy. Your ship recharges health. Also you can claim and island and heal there. It's so easy to the point it's actually boring, I got 10 kills before I quit, never got close to dying. Hell you can even claim an island, sit there in healing-mode, while shooting down enemy ships that don't heal...

A difficulty slider is a good idea though.

These aren't comparable situations.

For one it's a peace-time situation where strong-arming interventions are met with consequences, in this case China can stop supply of critical products to punish the Dutch. In a wartime situation such supply would've been stopped anyway, so there is nothing further to lose and everything to gain from an intervention, but such an intervention is only possible if the factory is on your soil.

Second, Nexperia is a legitimate Dutch company with Dutch expertise. The Chinese bought it. The Dutch don't need Chinese expertise to operate the local factory they built and sold to the Chinese.

Third, China is a global hegemon, South Korea isn't by comparison, and South Korea is a neighbour of China, the Netherlands isn't. China could pressure a battery factory in South Korea during a military conflict by military force, but in Western Europe that's a different story.

'breaking records' implies a lot more than it is. The amount of breaths anyone takes in their life also continues to break their own personal record, but it's not as impressive as it sounds.

Output today is 2x what it was 10 or 20 years ago. Nice but 'record breaking', meh. Especially in global context, it's quite tiny.

It's obviously both in different circumstances. I've had plenty of raises while the rest of my team didn't, and when I stopped doing what I was doing, I joined them.

PHEVs are typically discouraged in many countries nowadays, because drivers fall into one of two categories: A) plug-in to charge on a (virtually) daily basis at home B) plug-in to charge as necessary, some of whom have no home-charging (apartment-dweller)

PHEVs make no sense for category (A) people because there is no range-anxiety if you home-charge every day. Typical drivers do 40km a day on average. Even an entry-level Tesla model 3 has >530km of range, and goes up to 750km for the model 3.

PHEVs also make no sense for category (B) people, because the PHEV has just 50km of range. So if you don't plug in all the time, you're basically driving a gasoline car with an extra engine and a battery, increasing weight (= fuel) and maintenance cost.

Various studies of real-world usage have shown PHEVs are less efficient because the behavior of its drivers. They'd be better off just driving a regular hybrid, like a Corolla.

The only area where PHEVs make sense are people who drive short-distances on a daily basis, plug in the car always at home, yet make frequent (say weekend) long trips of 6+ hours of driving without any breaks, or long trips to remote areas with no charging infrastructure. This is a pretty rare combination. Most PHEVs are traditionally owned by urbanites lured by a green dream and green subsidies, who're better off getting a pure EV or just an efficient boring hybrid.

Netherlands here, it's great. Idk about Spain.

I think at the upper range, and for Teslas, this is true. But for the rest, not quite yet.

Suppose you buy an entry-level Renault 5, the WLTP range is 310km. In mild conditions you typically get 85-90% of that, enough for the majority of people. But in winter you get 65% of that, so 195km, on a new battery. And after 5 years that may be 165km in winter, and that's just not great. With home-charging that still is enough for most requirements, but you are more restricted for longer trips and have to charge diligently.

I live in an apartment so I wouldn't be home-charging daily, there'd be plenty of times I'd want to park my car at the first available spot in my area at 55% charge and use it the next day, which is even more restrictive.

For the entry-level Tesla the WLTP range is 530km or 70% more. There the problem is much less. And for home-chargers, it's also a no-brainer usually, especially with home solar. But for an apartment-dweller who just needs an entry-level car, it's still a toss-up between a new EV like a renault 5 for 30k, or just a Toyota Corolla Hybrid that gets great mileage, low maintenance and can be had new for 30k or a few years old for 20k.

Unfortunately, I refuse to buy a Tesla due to Musk's politics.

It's more like the recent events trigger people's awareness and learning about multi-year trends that are happening regardless of recent events.

EVs are a good deal in much of the world. They're more quiet, lower maintenance costs, lower fuel costs, therefore lower cost of ownership and operation. And they have less volatile costs as electricity prices swing less than gas prices.

Long-term trends show electricity and gas prices decouple.

It's just that every time gas prices spike, people look into solutions and find out these truths.

I didn't say work hard. But if you keep contributing what you already contributed previously and nothing changes, your salary likely also doesn't change. Changing that doesn't necessarily require working hard, I haven't made any such claim. In fact my salary inversely correlated with my effort. But I do recognize that when I stopped changing things (i.e. my role in the company became stagnant), my salary also remained stagnant.

I was at my previous company for almost 10 years, I had annual promotions and I roughly 4x'd my annual income in this period, which averages to about 15% of year-on-year pay increases. Part inflation, part growth in skills.

Virtually all of that happened in the first 8 years. In the last 2 years I also stalled and saw minor inflation corrections of 2% a year, so I quit.

In my experience it had everything to do with me. In the first 8 I was very hungry, and always willing to take on something more or different. In the last 2 I was very much set on just coasting and doing what I was already doing, and it translated in them paying what they had always paid me, plus a little for inflation correction.

I think the truth is usually that if others don't stall and you do, that the solution probably sits with you as well. That having been said, I think now with AI the value-add of an employee sees so much pressure, that I think stalling will be a major trend.

I don't understand your comment tbh...

For me it's as much culture as it is work. In fact I live in the capital city of my country, even though my work has not always been here. I live here because it has world class restaurants, bars, museums, architecture, parks, gyms, a dozen public swimming pools and a million amenities you wouldn't even think of but are fun to do once or twice, like there's dedicated restaurants where you can play jeux de boules.

And most importantly there's a million people here, statistically there's a good chance you run into people who're in the top 5% of whatever their field is in. Whether it's musicians, engineers, athletes, philosophers, there's a good chance you'll run into a lot of interesting ones.

My friend lives in a village and he has 1 pizzeria and 1 italian and 1 chinese restaurant. There's no gym. There's a very basic park with grass and some trees. There's no museums, architecture is all the same. There's no nightlife whatsoever. There's no real amenities, not even a library. There's a few shops with the basics, with very limited opening hours. There's as much nature nearby as there is for me. Tere's also no real way to make friends, and there's a few hundred people to meet at most, statistically most of them aren't very interesting to you (not 'not interesting in general', but 'to you'. It's easier to find 'your tribe' if you can select from a million vs a hundred).

So it's really the 'commute' or I should say proximity to culture, i.e. people, their thoughts and their creations, that sells the city for me, not the proximity to the company I happen to work for, which is sometimes in another city.

Uff Blue Burst, fantastic online game, it's one of those blasts of sheer nostalgia that is almost unbearable, I'd give everything to go back. It's partly the game, and partly my life around the time I was playing the game, a time of constant wonder and exploration and true excitement. There are times every few years that I just put the games' music album on a loop to relive the memories. Though just watching some gameplay is also fantastic with the sound and graphic design.

This is by the way how the defense was treated for decades as well. US resisted the EU from building a formidable army, instead they preferred a vassal state defense, enough to deter others from messing with Europe, not enough for Europe to be independent, and buying almost exclusively from US defense companies propping up US military R&D and financing factories during peacetime.

Now that the US has pivoted to Asia since Obama, they expect the EU to fill the gap they leave behind. But that’s new, the US wanted it exactly like it was pre 2014 or so.

Yes at the pay page there's a 'pay by X' list of options, you choose it.

You then typically have two choices: scan QR with your phone or login to your bank.

I normally open my bank app on my phone which signs in via my face (iPhone), I then press the scan button (first screen), point at my phone at the screen to read the QR code, the transaction pops up on my phone, I press confirm and again it signs via my face. Then you're done.

If you were shopping on the phone it's even simpler of course as the pay button opens up the transaction in your bank app right away, but typically I shop on my laptop after research.

I've had this for almost 20 years by the way in the Netherlands, but now it's pivoted to the EU standard.

Not implausible he hit those numbers, electric car ranges depend on a lot of factors, and he likely had a very small and favorable sample to get him to 258 wh/mile.

Some factors to consider: 1. Winter gets 20-25% less range 2. Poorly inflated tires get 3% less range 3. Driving at 60 mph requires 80% more energy per mile than driving at 20 mph

So if you take it together, test drives around town with proper tires in a Tesla 3 in summer, can get 130% better range than a tesla in winter on a highway with poorly inflated tires.

Most Tesla's average range is something between those two, say 260 wh/mi. But they can get below 200 in good conditions (summer driving at 30km/h). So if you take those good conditions and put a non-aerodynamic mustang body on it, it can do the same as a Tesla in average conditions.

No but every region has their own pros and cons. The idea Belgium has no other option than coal gas or nuclear is refuted, and biomass is just one of the reasons.

I don’t think its a long term issue. The cost of battery storage is below 10c per kWh, whereas a peaker plant costs above 20c per kWh and runs 10% of the time.

So if you get paid double the value of your battery the incentives are there for an economic model to work. Today.

And batteries are only getting cheaper, gas is the opposite.

Plus batteries take surplus solar/wind, at these times they have a negative value. Add that and the economics are a no brainer. It’s a matter of time.

Or solar / wind (which mostly anticorrelate) + biomass + storage + interconnectors + smart demand.

The amount of baseload we technically need can be pretty slim.

Take Denmark: fossil powers just 9% of their electricity generation, the majority of it is wind and solar. Wind is strong in evenings/nights, solar during the day.

Then they have biomass (indirect solar) as a form of baseload, more sustainable than coal/gas.

Then there's interconnectors, they're close to Norway which can pump hydro, and Sweden, each day about 25% of the electricity is exchanged between these two countries, and that's a growing figure.

With more east/west interconnectors you could move surplus solar between countries. Import from the east in the morning before your own solar ramps up, export your midday surplus west before theirs peaks, and import from the west in the late afternoon as yours fades.

With interconnectors you can also share rather than independently build peaker capacity. Because a lot of peaker plants only run a small amount of time and therefore much of the cost is in the construction/maintenance, not the fuel.

And of course there's storage, which will take a while to build out but the trendlines are extremely strong. Just a fleet of EVs alone, an average EV has a 60 kWh battery, an average EU household uses 12 kWh per day so an average car holds 5 days worth of power a home uses.

And then finally there's smart demand. An average car is parked for more than 95% of the day, and driven 5% of the time. Further, the average car drives just 40km a day which you can charge in 3 minutes on say a Tesla. Given these numbers (EVs store 5 days of household use, can sit at a charger for 23 hours a day, and can smartly plan the 3 minutes a day of charging it actually needs to do) just programming cars to charge smartly, is a trivial social and technical problem in the coming 10-20 years.

Given this, baseload coal/gas can really be minimised the coming decades. It's not going to go away as a need, but I don't think it requires gas/coal or nuclear long-term going forward.

What a waste of energy (money/resources)... Scraping and AI-scanning 2 million photos to identify animals in the advertisement pictures? What's the point.

As an exercise a sample of 1000 photos would've been enough. As a database, knowing a listing has a cat in the picture or a funny review doesn't offer any real value.

I wonder what the footprint is of such an exercise.

For context Doge saved 2-3 billion by independent estimates. And cut some of the most important international aid around the world.

Right, but Trump has stated he can accept working with the regime without consequence, like in Venezuela, as long as they cooperate on key issues e.g. oil and Israeli security concerns. He couldn’t care less that the regime is killing its own people. Like he couldn’t care less about Israel’s illegal occupation and murder.

To think Trump did this war to save Iranian lives from its own government is hopelessly naive. It was not at all a leading factor.

Drones have a limited range and limited capacity to inflict damage. Yes, they are effective at hunting infantry, but you can't reach across an ocean and strike the US with "millions of drones".

I wonder when drone carrier subs become a thing.

I've had various arguments online and got literal responses from an LLM after the second or third message. It's extremely disrespectful, instead of engaging with a human acting in good faith, I'm now conversing with a bot with a prompt 'prove him wrong'.

It explicitly undermines the foundation to the only debate I am willing to entertain which is: (1) I enter into the debate in good faith, that both parties intend to seek truth and understand.

And it replaces that with a different debate: (2) I enter into the debate to win, its is adversarial, and I will use a prompt to seek to win regardless of truth or understanding.

That second conversation is pointless for me, I refuse to engage in it. Yet it is obfuscated. The human using a bot to engage secretly in debate (2) while pretending he's a human engaging in debate (1).

Nah about 5% of electricity is from biomass, not 33%. The 33% figure is regarding gross energy production, not electricity. Otherwise agreed.

It's not just 'a random website' and it aligns with CBS numbers.