He has built a following of people that want to hear his extra skeptical views. And even if he changed his mind about some things, he cannot admit it, as that is not what his followers want to hear from him.

It's rare that people make the news and build a following by saying a very balanced, down to earth opinions... unfortunately.

Agriculture is a huge pollutant, so we should take steps towards alternatives that don't require large scale animal farming.

Fashion is another gigantic pollutant, where fast fashion generates and discards more clothes than it is feasible to wear.

etc.

In practice, no.

In my experience there is no correlation between payment and state of bathroom. I've been to paid ones in terrible state and free ones in amazing state. And I also don't see any trend or correlation there.

In Europe it's frequently teenagers (even those whom parents provide good lives), football fans, drunk people, etc.

Some people are antisocial and destroy public stuff just for laughs, not because they feel resentment towards society.

Within EU we already pay ~€3 for packages from China. And in Austria we will soon pay additional ~€2 for every delivered package. And 20% VAT.

Edit:

I am pretty sure at least some part of these already contribute towards recycling.

The goal here is likely not just to get more funding for recycling, but rather to use materials that can be recycled in the first place. Which you cannot achieve simply by charging businesses or consumers more.

In the code define everything as a span with a name, scope (start-end), description and tags... and then you can easily dynamically produce traces, spans, logs or metrics based on what you need.

When it comes to improving performance by a few ms, or implementing a new feature, business people will always choose a new feature, unless the current performance is unbearably slow (we're talking regular 1.5s+ wait times for BE response).

And it's not even a modern problem, legacy software written 20 years ago has the same latency than most modern backends from my experience.

Underdocumented, underexplained and sometimes out of date... or overly verbose, repetitive, information sparse, and sometimes halucinating.

Both are bad and with some effort could be prevented.

If you're exposed to AI a lot, you're going to start noticing patterns that allow you to identify it.

Does speed reading help you process the final message faster if it's written by AI compared to people?

Because if you read 1 information dense sentence, 1 medium dense, and 1 sparse sentece written by a human, it's still way less text in total than 6 information sparse sentences written by AI... even if it's all over the place when it comes to density or style.

---

The density argument is really interesting.

Does speed reading actually help you process the final message faster when it’s AI-generated compared to human-written?

For example, if a human writes 3 sentences—one information-dense, one medium-density, and one sparse—that’s still much less text overall than 6 relatively sparse sentences written by AI.

Even if the AI output varies a lot in information density and writing style, you still have to process all that additional text. So I’m wondering whether speed reading actually offsets the verbosity of AI-generated responses, or whether the total amount of text is still the bigger factor.

Isn't it rather a subjective philosophical concept? What if human intelligence is also a statistical model, trained by evolution to make decisions that lead to offspring?

The one major difference I see between AI and people is the ability to learn and memorize. All memory/learning solutions that current AI architectures offer just feel like workarounds and simply don't work anywhere near as a person learning something new and remembering it.

There is still a lot of work done on the background, perhaps even more than ever.

But unless you are a power user eagerly waiting for one of the things currently worked on, you wouldn't notice or care unless the interface changes (which usually only happens on visual interfaces).

After Microsoft acquired them, they started rolling out new features at an incredible pace. And if you look at the breakdown of the downtime, most of the downtime is in features that didn't exist before the acquisition.

Though not all of the downtime is in new features. The core is also less stable than ever.

If I think the task requires a human to think about it. And the person is the human paid to think about it. Whether I get a wall of AI text, prompt, or an entire AI conversation... there is no human insight in it.

If that person took the time to think about the problem, had a chat with the AI, and understood the output, surely they can take the final step and tell me the short result/summary themselves, right?

---

However, if I had to choose lesser evil, I would of course prefer to have a link to the AI conversation over having a wall of text directly in the conversation.

In my eyes it would be a ginormous gain to our colective mental health to not have the expectation to contribute to open source projects for free, or to have "green squares" every day on a public GitHub profile.

It's no wonder they casually state it as inevidable, when their stock price rises the more people believe it.

Wait. Why? Do they?

If the problem is the lack of housing. Why wouldn't building more be a solution?

Or are you refering that the phrase itself is dismissive of existing issues?

However, I wouldn't diss the "ultraspeed" options untill I try them. Having agent thinking become near instant could change the way I (or you) use agents.