The issue is how much of that work is "valuable" in the sense = makes money.

I have both been in projects and seen projects which were canceled once it turned out they didn't make money (bad sales? bad product? bad market fit? a bit of everything?). This you can only afford when you have money to spare (= with debts? high profits...?).

With the interest rates so high, how can a company justify hiring dozens/hundreds of people more? It's a risk, and what I am seeing now is that companies are shrinking left and right to focus on the business that makes money and reduce headcount on what they believe doesn't make money at all, or it's a cost too high for their "long term strategy" or whatever. Right now the only metrics that they are caring about is EBIDTA. They don't even care anymore about ARR, they are becoming irrelevant as long as they stay within a range (we want 20% increase, but we're ok with 5%).

The AI will replace everything and everyone is working out pretty well for Anthropic/OpenAI, though.

Just put a "designer" in one of these cars and let them drive in real life situations like:

- a wasp entering your car, while you're approaching the entrance to the highway

- a child suddenly appears on the street from behind an SUV so big you could barely see the sidewalk

- a traffic light, green for you, but red for the car coming straight for your door.

We're past the "happy path". Try real life shit in your tests and maybe we'll install less screens and more sensors to actually help you drive, instead of distracting you.

Saving someone's life should be more important than a dumb undeserved promotion because you digitalized the whole car.

Unless it's a "0.0%" alcohol-free beer, and even then it might still contain a bit...

For example, the previous German government was paying influencers for sponsoring heat pumps. All these "content creators" must be paid by someone - left, right, center, oil, nuclear, gas companies, it's like watching TV for its advertisements. Crazy what it has become.

So, that will most likely never change, although that's probably in the top 3 reasons why social media is unusable.

Usually there are compatible ones that still give you some juice for 1-2 years at a small fraction of the price (of the original one).

If you worry about that, you can always buy an "official" battery in advance to be used 4-5 years later.

I am not into cybersecurity but the existing "technical debt" in terms of security has been barely exploited.

The issue is that literally all software has some vulnerability, want it or not. And these LLMs are like brute forcing all possibilities faster than a human can do. Sometimes humans even ignore low security issues, while maybe these LLMs are capable to build exploits on top of multiple ones.

For me they understood the moat - cybersecurity is such a trivial space to get into, I guess they are investing heavily on that because as someone else mentioned in other threads, it's obvious they are too limited for other tasks.

Becoming a "mandatory" (SOC-2 etc, things like that) integrated part of your CI/CD pipeline would be a huge win for them. Imagine that.

Oh right, the kids...

100% renewables is the exact opposite of "100% non-renewables" and that's including also oil, gas, etc. So "coal" is only a part of the 100% non renewables, but it seems your goal is to get rid of all the non renewables.

And here the question is: why would you want a single goal? Why 100% renewable?

What drives us should be: save where it makes sense, don't where it doesn't. Iterate every 10 years and recheck.

All these single radical goals are literally killing our economy and society. And I am not just talking about coal free or renewable.

Even the "let's tear down the windfarms" is dumb because it's radical and non sense.

Or unrelated, even this "we need to digitalize everything" (although given our jobs we would profit the most) can lead to a lot of problems (privacy, security, etc).

I don't know why we have become so radical in the last 20 years.

The more specific they are, the more accurate they typically are.

I know what you meant, but I think that there are alternatives, even if they are maybe not as good as the ones made in US.

Also, if the goal is to go all in on data sovereignty, so be it - put the companies in the sanctions list. It will only grow.

For me the main BIG deal is that cloud models have online search embedded etc, while this one doesn't.

However, if you don't need that (e.g., translate, summarize text, writing code) probably is good enough.

Afterwards you have to pay some of the highest taxes in the world....

In NL I remember Bol was quite good.