You (we) are old :)

I was a bit rougher though: I just took a backup, then let my Hermes agent (Gemini 3.1 Pro) loose on it. It upgraded everything that needed to be upgraded, patched what needed to be patched, then proceeded to migrate everything to it's most recent equivalents. After that, a fair bit of server hardening was carried out followed by debloating of unused services. Likely would have continued to procrastinate doing this if it wasn't for AI support.

Even Germany is a dumb one, really. The only reason why they didn't participate is because they legally weren't allowed to. What they did do, however, is deploy huge numbers to various US bases around the world so that the US can have a larger deployment.

The only absurdity here is the idea that the European retconning is believable.

> The US famously renamed French fries in protest.

The same French who very famously made Israel the nuclear-capable pariah state that it is today.

No assumptions, it's all fact.

> I was out on the streets protesting the 2003 GWB Iraq invasion war

You mean the war that all the European countries participated in? How about Libya? Syria? or the various conflicts in Israel? Surely you also opposed what's happening in Yemen right?

> And you seem to have this way of boiling literally everything down to some sort of unspecified racism

Suggesting 'we are trustworthy to have nuclear capabilities, but those other people are not' is racist, yeah. Considering the most crackpot nations responsible for most of the global instability and suffering over the last few centuries are also the ones who seem to think they can decide who can and can't utilize energy sources. Let me know when you show similar concern about Israel.

European takes are usually the funniest. It's literal racism (as in, one race is better than the other) but it's packaged in such a ridiculous way that you somehow suggest that it's doing others a favor.

It's just banks investing in private equity firms. So it's still banks, just by proxy, due to 2008 regulation.

It's not the smaller players spending billions on training data.

Simultaneously, we also hype up the open models that are catching up. That are significantly more discounted, that also put pressure on the big players and keep them in check.

People aren't falling for PR; people are encouraging the PR to put pressure on the competition. It's not that hard.

The only countries with a successful secondary fallback are those who use geothermal or hydro, with the latter being opposed by the same environmentalists who oppose nuclear. Not every country has geothermal energy, nor do most countries have hydro, and most of the countries with either of those don't have enough to power their grid. The only ones that do have no real manufacturing. The issue is front and center: the ones that need it the most are the ones who are unable to utilize it.

In the interim, until meaningful storage exists, it's the 'environmentalist' anti-nuclear crowd who have plunged the world into chaos and contributed to endless destruction of the planet. The world is still using fossil fuels because the world has no alternative other than nuclear.

There needs to be a stepping stone - and that stepping stone is nuclear. Until then, the stepping stone is oil, coal and gas. Which means Middle Eastern wars, environmental destruction and fracking. Dealing with whatever fallout that comes from nuclear, with room for those who can't support nuclear to use fossil fuels, while the rest of the world figures out a real way forward on how to collect and store solar and wind is the only path forward.

Yeah, because solar and wind are both expensive and unreliable, and fossil fuels are both expensive and destructive. The point is that the price isn't worth it.

> There is still no long time storage for the nuclear waste.

This is a non-argument, just like it was last year.

> And even if we ignore that. People are worried about drones flying over airports. Wait when drones fly over nuclear power plants.

2026, new argument dropped. Almost as much of a non-argument as the one above.

> Talking about energy independence, what do you think where the nuclear fuel comes from?

There's uranium everywhere https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_uranium_r... and it's not much more of a search away to find out who already refines it.

> BTW if you don’t want to pay the membership fee of a country aka taxes, you’re free to leave

The membership fee isn't giving up your money, the membership fee is participating in improving the country. It's this backwards ethos that has most European countries in the toilet.

You missed the asterisk where endless dependence on coal, gas or oil is a non-optional requirement.

Who the hell cares if nuclear is expensive to get going? Plenty of things cost a lot - healthcare, social spending, roads, all of it. Those war machines that exist to prop up the fossil fuel industry cost a pretty penny as well. It's only when we get to nuclear that the talking point becomes cost. If governments don't even want to provide energy independence then perhaps they should end the slavery they call income tax.

I’m not that opinionated though - I don’t really care that much. But the part that sucked was installing it on a 2020 intel MacBook Pro. It basically made it unusable to the point of being ready to throw it out. Going back from Tahoe breathed so much life into it that it was fairly upsetting to see Apple release it. It reminded me of early iPhone updates that would basically brick older devices due to the performance impact.