jack_tripper

You don't think that adult taxpayers with full time careers and mortgages have a higher chance at a better understanding of the state of play, than kids who can't spell their name without asking CHatGPT?

Didn't I say the same thing?

>We humans still havent figured out how to structure institutions without constructive destruction in the end.

And we never will. There's nothing to figure out here, since human greed is constant everywhere. No matter what perfect system you think you create, over time, power hungry greedy sociopaths climb to the top, and steer it to favor them and their cronies until it collapses.

Did those far right people wish for the current version of the EU, or the 1970's ideal of the EU?

Because without accounting for the massive societal changes since then, it's disingenuous to say those people were having the same ideas of today back then.

Pretty sure back then the far right's ideal of the EU was one when you could leave your bike unlocked without it getting stolen, christmas markets didn't need to have anti-terrorist attack barriers, and Sweden and Germany didn't top the charts of sexual assaults per capita.

>That isn't true. Plenty of right wing people have been Europhiles, even the far right.

Like who? Give me someone living and active today.

>>Are you the opinion police?

>For asking a question?

Calling someone a doomer then pretending you were just asking a question is bad faith argumentation so I'll have to end the conversation with you.

>What specific regulation is causing tremendous benefit to Denmark but is causing harm to Romania?

That was only a though exercise for an example. But to answer your question with something concrete it would be auto industry regulations for example. If China would destroy Eu's auto industry, Denmark wouldn't care since they don't have one, they'll reap the benefits of cheap Chinese import but it would wreck auto making countries like Slovakia or Romania.

>And if Romania pays a lot for energy spot price then that is on Romania, similar to Germany, on top of this grocery prices are not regulated by the EU.

No, that's on the EU, since the EU forced everyone to tie electricity to gas energy prices in the name of environmentalism which disproportionately affects poorer countries.

> On top of this grocery prices are not regulated by the EU

Doesn't matter that the EU doesn't regulate the food prices, but it's the outcome of the EU free market it led to for poorer nations like Romania and obviously Romanians aren't happy.

A lot of EU market regulations have negativity affected the poorer people of the poorer member States. And they still have a right to vote.

That's how you have massive pro an anti EU splits in the same country. Because central planning tends to produce massive economic gaps between the winners and losers of the planning policies.

If nukes were such an obvious cheat code to victory, Moscow would have just nuked Kiev instead of struggling in embarrassment for 4 years.

Are you the opinion police?

>the entire point of a healthy relationship is to compromise and try to understand the other side, which is the point of the EU

The problem with compromise is that everyone becomes equally unhappy. And when everyone is unhappy strange results come at elections.

EU member states are so different, that you can't have regulations that benefits an economy like Denmark and also simultaneously one like Romania. Which is how places like Romania now have German energy and grocery prices but Romanian wages and pensions. Not exactly a great compromise for a lot of Romanians.

>So Spain contributes to the east as a compromise for getting heavy subsidies themselves.

It doesn't matter how it is in reality, what matters is how Spanish voters perceive it come election times. Elections are always won on vibes and feels rather than facts and arguments.

The EU started with noble goals, but given enough time, the purpose of any large bureaucracy shifts to growing even larger and only existing to justify its own existence, rather than serving its original intended purpose.

Remember the "What would you say...you do here?" Bobs from Office Space where workers in useless jobs couldn't explain why their job is needed but they insisted they were needed.

You see this in the corporate world on a daily basis, but government bureaucracies are no different.

Says who?

Tribalism along with own group preference, is one of the core human instincts, in line with the search for food, shelter and the reproductive instinct. You are free to ignore this instinct because you feel more academically enlightened or something, but you will be in for a rude awakening when you'll find yourself in the minority and eliminated from the gene pool by those who let themselves driven by basic instinct and will vote and reproduce accordingly.

>If we can finally get rid of those impediments, we will be able to project so much more power.

Yes, if we can get rid of local democratic governments with direct accountability and replace them with an unaccountable EU dictatorship, we'll have so much power projection.

I don't, with or without further integration. Not everyone or everything is meant to survive. Everything has a shelf life. The Roman empire also collapsed. Rearranging the deckchairs of the titanic doesn't change the outcome.

>What is your preferred model? All of us staying in little insignificant countries, kowtowing to larger powers?

A union is good, but the EU only worked at preventing another world war between members, not at helping us be united against foreign entities, because you can't force unity between different dethatched cultures just because we're neighbours, as proven by Yugoslavia, the USSR, etc.

Every EU member is still driven by self interest and own group preference, which will be the EU's doom. Like Spain doesn't really care as much about the Eastern war as Poland or Romania do because they're far away from the war and don't see why they should pay more taxpayer money for it. Germans care more about something happening in Austria than about what's happening in Bulgaria. And so on.

Unless the EU gangs up on you and takes away your veto ability "in case of emergency", in which case you have to shut up and take it.

>The others can't, of course. That's the point! We become one of the predators instead of staying prey like them.

Do you not see the irony here?

Do you think Lithuania, or other such small countries like Serbia, Albania, Bosnia, Georgia, etc, can negotiate on equal terms with the EU?

I got news for you, when you're small country bordering large empires, you're gonna get absorbed into one or the other, whether you want to or not, because you don't really have a choice.

The EU has not modeled itself around the USA, what are you on about?

>(By the way, some far rightists have pushed a united Europe for some time. The two ideas are not necessarily contradictory. Oswald Mosley was such a person.)

Had no idea who Oswald Mosley even was, but looking him up, he's been dead for 30+ years now. It's disingenuous to paint such long deceased people as still representative for their original cause today.

People change, organisations change and countries change over the decades. What was a democratic/left-wing point 30 years ago (strict immigration controls) is now considered far right extremism.

The EU, in its form back then from 30 years ago is different than the EU beast of today which swallowed the previously separate EU, EEC and EC post 2009. The US of 30 years ago is different than the US of today because society has changed a lot since then both demographically and economically.

You can't dig up people from 70 years ago as representative for the same ideologies because both the ideologies and the people are different now. That's like driving forward while only looking in the rearview mirror.

Right wing people have and will be Eurosceptics (Euro here meaning the EU org in Brussels, not Europe the continent) since they don't want to be led by a foreign org that's not directly accountable to them.

Robovacs aren't a drop-in replacement for a maid, they aren't a fire and forget cleaning solution for a house that's already dirty and messy or have constant spills and stuff left on the floor, but more for regular maintenance of an orderly place that still gets cleaned or maintained in the tough to reach places every now and then.

But if your place resembles a crack house, a robovac won't magically clean it.

The logic to me is "how can they do that?". You don't need a cloud service to program a microcontroller and they can't force that upon you even if they'd want to since the arduino board is not an iPhone.

Roborock didn't win because of doing marketing, they won by being technically superior and word of mouth, in spite of lack of marketing, at least in the west.

Same how Japanese cars beat US made cars in the 1980s even though US cars had the most amount of advertising in the media. Even Steve Jobs said in the 90s that US brands have the best marketing and win all meaningless "awards by industry critics", but if you ask consumers which products are best, they all say the Japanese ones.

Chinese products are now the new Japanese. I still have no idea why westerners assumed "Chinese can't innovate, they can only replicate".

Thanks you! Sad that HN gets ideologically captured in the same mob behavior instead of thinking logically and practically.

Are they more in number and easier to use than the Arduino libraries?

>If anything, with the drag-n-drop flashing it is even easier to work with than an Arduino.

Why do you think the Arduino is more difficult than "drag-n-drop flashing" by comparison? Do you think one click is more difficult?

How do you know the 500 million sales is due to the Arduino ecosystem?

I used to work in embedded for 10+ years and in the 4 companies I worked at so far, none of the products ever featured AVR microcontrollers. The microcontroller of choice for production was always based on the feature/cost ratio for each application, never on the "is it part of the Arduino ecosystem?" question.

Tinkering with Arduino at home, and building products for mass production, have widely different considerations.

I think you're missing the point of what made arduino so popular. It's not the HW itself, it's that you can plug in whatever display, sensor or motor driver out there, and there's ready made templates in the IDE that gets you running immediately, without you having to know anything about how the HW or SW works under the hood.

The lack of dual cores or "fun IO coprocessor" whatever fun is in that context, was never an issue for the arduino.

There's a virtually unlimited number microcontrollers and boards out there for tinkering or production, that are more powerful and have more features, but they all have a higher technical barrier to entry than the standard Arduino out of the box.

I don't wanna have to read datasheets and erratas just to learn how to use a second core, deal with shared memory between cores, or how to configure the GPIO of the "fun IO coprocessor" just to get a LED blinking to work. That's not what fun is to a lot of people. Fun is getting the motor spinning until my coffee finishes brewing and that's where the Arduino ecosystem USP was versus other more powerful platforms.

How would you even be sure of this just from what you can see from the outside? That doesn't mean your health insurance company isn't using Zivver internally same how they use Office 365 or SAP. It's not like they tell you all the SW they use.

Like how about a call to Benny's office saying "hey buddy, reign your dogs in, our citizens are off limits"?

What we want is probably platform agnostic PWAs that will run on any device with a browser.

We will never have freedom as long as were forced to choose between Google and Apple walled gardens.

When the hell was even that?