The correct spot for the fuse is the appliance itself. Fuses used to be easily replaceable, often with fuse holders [1]. I have, however, never seen a computer with one.

[1] https://uk.farnell.com/productimages/large/en_US/4578676.jpg

- Geofenced areas

- pre-build structures

- Curated infrastructure

- fallback to gravel in times of the inevitable event of maintenance.

This is not general transportation, it is a highend infrastructure inside a controlled environment. The system degrades exactly where humans/horses do not: River crossings, Creeks, steep hillsides, marshes, beaches.

A river flooding a road is not and "edge case", it a usual occurrence, and a problem that roads do robustly solve. It works due to extensive maintenance, not because the asphalt can actually deal with water.

Scaling that beyond a few mapped US suburbs into Europe is a totally different problem. Dont get fooled by Wall Street stock pumping.

It also was Wales who bought up the topic, not the journalist. If he considers it a stupid topic he does not want to talk about, why is it the very first thing he talks about?

Please don't do that. The map is simply not good enough and does not have enough context (road quality, terrain, trail difficulty) for anything but very causal activity. Even then I highly recommend to use a proper map, electronic or paper.

This is the best endorsement for wikipedia possible.

>We phased out nuclear power plants

your words. simple past tense.

What you claim didn't happen, and can easily disproven with data. Your interpretation of a reasoning of a policy (that didn't happen) is bad faith.

You are wrong about both electricity [1], gas[2] and total energy [3].

Europe was very dependent on energy imports in the past and current policy is the by far most successful attempt in a long at changing it. It will help us for decades to come.

[1] https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/electricity-prod-source-s...

[2] https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/infographics/where-does-t...

[3] https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/electricity-prod-source-s...

That is just plain wrong, as anybody who spent more than 10 minutes with a LLM within the last 3 years can attest. Give it a try, especially if you care to have an opinion on them. Ask an absurd question (that can be, in principle, answered) that nobody has asked before and see how it performs generalizing. The hype is real.

I'm interested what study you refer to. Because I'm interested in their methods and what they actually found out.

These where not some SWE wonderlands either. The code was truly awful at times.

The Joel test is 25 years old. It's a industry standard. I, and many other people consider it a minimum requirement for software engineering. If code the "2. Can you make a build in one step?" requirement i should be ide-browsable in one step.

If it takes weeks to replicate a setup the whole environment is deeply flawed. The one-step build is the second point on the list because Joel considered it the second most important thing, out of 12.

I want to use a text editor => This is the wrong tool => Yes, but I want to use a text editor.

These people do use the wrong tooling. The only way to cure this grievance is to use proper tooling.

The github webui has some ide features, such as symbol search. I don't see any reason why not use a proper ide. github.dev is a simple click in the ui away. When you use gerrit, do a local checkout, that's one git command.

If you refuse to use the correct tools for the job, your experience is degraded. I don't see a reason to consider this case when writing code.

The fact that it's mostly backwards compatible means you can reproduce almost all issues of c in c++ awell, but the average case fares much better. Real world C++ does not have double-frees, for example. (As real world C++ does not have free() calls).