WhrRTheBaboons

american ai companies are hypocrites on that front. they want copyright to not exist when it's them using copyrighted material, but afterwards they fight tooth and nail to enforce their own.

otherwise there is no moat and all that fortune that you envision them spending on anti-IP lobbying would not exist in the first place.

its pretty telling that the only compelling argument put forth by their own article is 'advertising'

code is used to 'speak' to computers. prose is meant for human communication.

if your readme is meant to only ever be read by 'agents' then fine. if you want actual humans to read it, write in a human language, not LLM-speak.

it literally could not be more simple.

>As default weather - I would prefer sunny day instead of rain…

But then it would not be an authentic Warsaw experience!

because rich fucks can't keep it in their pants? how would that be indicative of anything?

That's generally true for all LLMs, but as with any tool - you can actually use it in a way that produces actual, verifiable results. Obviously it requires a lot of work that 99% of people won't put into what is essentially seen as a 'magic black box', but I do agree with GP that Gemini is quite useful in actually breaking things down in an understandable way, compared to most other models.

My experience with it is mostly using it against an actual, academic source, where I can easily tell if it starts making things up. I wouldn't rely on it for anything that I can't confirm myself.

Poland has massive issues with curtailment due to grid overload at peak hours

Currently Solar PV output is incredibly unbalancing but hopefully batteries will offset that in the coming years

The Polish HoMM III Championship is happening right now, with last semi-finals match scheduled for 30/31 October, ahead of Grand Finals in Gdańsk 13-15 November.

h3.gg for anyone interested

shorting is not really viable anyway because you need the timing as much as the direction

it worked for the big short guys because the knew exactly when it was going to go bust

no one has had to pay back any of the loans yet. the valuations right now mean precisely nothing.

if these hold a year after an IPO then we can talk.

to be fair they did say 'organic capitalism' - which I interpret the same way as 'true communism' in that it probably cannot really exist.

real-life, unregulated capitalism lends itself to exactly what you described

You can see it plainly on the Solar PV market. The likes of Trina, JA, Jinko, etc. all compete aggressively, leading to everyone running at a loss in order to corner the market, and then after a few years the government steps in and orders all of them to raise prices. Happened again at the beginning of this year, raising cost of PV Modules 30-40% for oversees consumers.

Contrast that to US being happy with everyone eating each other alive until all but one company is left standing and can now dictate the prices and enshittify the product to pay back their VC loans.

FYI, first two examples are identical here: https://pele.run/examples/timeline

Edit: So is #7 (and almost #8), #9, 10, 11, 12 are identical as well

you can check for yourself

e.g. https://www.edenai.co/models/deepseek-v4-1-flash

RE: clean power - China is by far the biggest leader in getting renewables off the ground, but they are also still comfortably the biggest polluter, so it's difficult to compare.

The unfortunate truth behind at least the solar PV boom in China is that it's driven in large part by the exploitation of Uyghurs in the Xinjiang region. One of the reasons they can sustain the pace they're going at is because while nowadays PV modules exports increasingly gravitate towards offshore fabs (Vietnam, Malaysia), domestically all the biggest PV players make full use of modern slavery within Xinjiang's re-education camps.

more on the topic: https://www.shu.ac.uk/-/media/home/research/helena-kennedy-c...

>International trade is fine, but only when it’s not a commodity easily obtained inside your own nation

It might be a minor nitpick, but that part is just not how the macroeconomic principle works. Abundance of a good/service within a country is irrelevant to the concept of a comparative advantage - this is counter-intuitive but but that was David Ricardo's entire point. It's not about whether production is more efficient domestically, it's whether comparative allocation of resources between multiple countries is more efficient by specialization within the different goods.

Even if you can produce "good 1" cheaper in Country A vs Country B, if Country A can instead produce "good 2" that Country B cannot, it's better for Country A to produce "good 2" domestically and import "good 1".

Now, I still agree with the original notion. It's unnecessarily risky to use services from "democratically-challenged" nations (especially imperialist ones), when safer options are available. But there's no need to twist macro 101 concepts to justify that view. Modern trade policy takes more into account than basic market efficiency.

be honest, you held up spork, didn't you?

>I think if GA was being introduced today, it would be have to jump through incredible hurdles to be used

It's very easy to say that it shouldn't have to be the case with the hindsight of GA being successfully used for centuries.

I would be much more interested in an example of a drug/medical procedure/research that currently is having to jump through such hurdles that people think should be treated as permissively as GA or the theoretical 'cancer cure', despite there not yet being any evidence of its long term effects - as would be the case with a hypothetical AI 'cancer cure' that's not understood by medical professionals.

Personally I can see the arguments for both sides of the coin, but I find GA to be a bad example.

disingenuous comments such like these are, in fact, pointless to engage with

That's incredibly naïve. If being morally right was all it took, slavery would not have been a thing in the first place.

Do you think people just naturally become more aware of immoral things? Even if you assume better education is the single reason, that's something that's very much not a given, and is in fact constantly being attacked by people who benefit from it not being guaranteed.

When you're fighting against billionaires who want to act against your best interest, do you believe you just need to appeal to people's morality and it's an easy win? Sorry to say it doesn't work like that, though it'd be wonderful if it did. People's minds are swayed easier by financial interests than they are by moral value. That's the impact of a capitalist system allowing levels of inequality putting even people's livelihood in danger.

Status quo is much easier to defend than it is to disrupt, regardless of how immoral it is in the first place. And disruption needs drastic measures to be successful when fighting an asymmetrical war of resources.

flutter? idk

>the economist

I do like the idea as well. however, the weird, unnecessary bevel[0] does give off some ai vibes.

in any case, pretty much all of those sites look like boilerplate vibe-coded startup templates.

[0] https://41labs.ai/logo-nav.png?v=2

Probably not a lot of people. But a sizeable portion will instead go 'Huh, I guess it's not on Amazon. I'll wait until it is' and end up not buying the book.

Amazon won't care because it's peanuts for them. Sellers will care and will pay amazon more in ad revenue than it will cost in potential sales.

what? i literally include the (actually sourced) eurostat figures in the comment. they just don't measure what OP was saying they do.

do you want me to run my own study of personal home ownership or something? lol

Seems interesting. What would you say are the biggest missing points currently or things you want to get working/improved but couldn't yet?

he just rings up his microsoft daddy

how many paying ones?

A website does not a source make.

It's citing a wikipedia article, which itself has been flagged for needing a better source [0]. The wikipedia in turn cites Statista [1], which claims this is "original data" that cannot be verified without a paid account.

Additionally, the number itself seems to actually be taken from Eurostat (an actual source) [2], which helpfully defines what they mean as the 87% for Poland. Surprise, surprise, it's not actually "87% of Poles own a house". It's "87% of Poles live in households owning or renting their home". That's also conveniently missing from another headline-grabbing numbers like "16% share of housing costs to total disposable income", which refers to the total income of the entire household.

And if you want to delve deeper as for why these numbers might be what they are, you have to consider the following too:

Poland has Europe's 2nd highest share (>50%) of adults living with in their parents' home [3], with 3rd lowest average number of rooms per person [2], 2nd highest household size (number of people) [2], with one third of people living in overcrowded homes (3rd highest in Europe, vs the EU average of 16%)[2].

All this being said, I don't doubt for a second that US is much worse in this regard.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Owner-occupancy#International_...

[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/246355/home-ownership-ra...

[2] https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/interactive-publications/h...

[3] https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/ilc_lvps09/de...

you got a source for that?