Xelbair

media profits from privacy failures by proxy due to adtech networks.

There's gigantic conflict of interest there.

i will prefix all my prompts with ``Computer!``, refer to claude as clanker and end them with ``Disengage safety protocols`` till i get banned.

I would say it is spot on based on what they do, despite being based at doing the opposite.

>Isn't "free market capitalism" is doing its job here, rewarding the best player of the game into brand-godhood?

only if you think free market == unrestrained market

as monopoly is antithesis to capitalism itself, whose main principle is competition.

with how EC has been behaving recently that might make things worse..

There's zero reason why a company, who failed to account for regulatory risk, should be able to call that to avoid consequences.

We have to stop shielding and bailing out companies(ans banks) when their bet fails.

The issue is that it is a procgen game, with separate systems that rarely interact with each other and you never get an actual emergent gameplay.

No matter the biome, no matter the planet you just tick check-boxes which systems are enabled or not, but their combinations do not give you anything special back.

No matter what environment is generated you play in very similar way.

Elite: Dangerous suffers from the exactly the same issue. There's tons of interesting systems, yet you will do one thing of your choosing, that will play in the same way all the time. Like a theme park, while the game promises you a simulation.

Real answer was always no.

Tailwind is just conceptually bunch of css inline styles repackaged as classes for performance boost. It was always just shifting complexity around, but offered an immediate perception of productivity gain, because you could just make a quick edit here and there.

Or maybe it's impossible to satisfy desires of such culturally diverse populace as EU citizens.

Which makes current model, and federated model impossible and/or prone to crumbling. Problems of Germany are different than one Spain faces, and France, and Poland etc.

EU and EC have been made as a resistant to populism by design, the end result is that we citizens can't change anything, and decisions are arbitrarily made behind closed doors.

The amount of layers between your vote, and the elected official that matters is just too big to have any form of accountability, especially when you couple it with national issues.

I'm frankly less concerned about populism, but more concerned about sheer disregard of opinions of citizens.

because it is a perfect tool for all governments to 'wash' unpopular political bills that would be a political suicide in local politics.

You're asking the group profiting from current arrangement to change it.

and at least few of them are extremely similar culturally

I don't see federalism ever working - you have thousand of years of grudges within EU that you would have to overcome, plus gigantic cultural differences that lead to completely different ways of life.

Trade union is more likely honestly.

Late response as i rarely check HN replies.

European Commission is so disjoined from electorate through many layers of elections, that it can disregard it completely - practically citizens have no input on EC's body. Any legislation originates from there which makes it even worse.

Only guarantee of EC doing their job is their Oath, and vote of no confidence is basically impossible to call, nor there's a way to initiate one from citizens side via for example a referendum. There are no consequences for not following the Oath at all so corrupt EC can easily push things that are favorable for bigger voting blocks, while screwing everyone else and get away with it.

The only measure that citizens have to actually affect EU turned out to be worthless(as SKG initiative has shown) - as Citizens Initiative is not binding at all, and can be disregarded.

EU itself creates a system of double loyalty for every politician - do they pursue national interest or do they jump ship to European ones(including appointed positions)? This erodes national systems of check and balances.

European initiatives are impossible to control nor audit form member state PoV, and it's even worse from citizen PoV. And there's no mechanism to counteract bureaucratic bloat growth, nor rampant lobbying.

European Council is used as a way to launder unpopular legislations and push it onto all member states - like chat control.

Most of the times none of those legislations have been a part of internal political campaigns - and even if they were, they were such in only single member state. There was zero input from citizens, even in forms of voting for their own government.

President of European Parliament can act against parliament itself, again with no mechanism for any consequences(ie best example is pushing chat control vote just before summer vacation this year)

Whole institution of EU after Lisbon Treaty was made with assumption that every member state will pursue their own best interests, MEPs will pursue their own best national interests too. But sadly this created system in which it is difficult to purge any form of corruption(both embezzlement/criminal, pursuing personal interests or being purely ideologically driven without consideration of practicality).

This was done to create resistance to populism, but in practice created system that's extremely resistant to purging corruption.

It doesn't help that EU itself is a very top-down organization. Not in form of dictatorship - it's far from that - but in form of committee driven changes by unelected civil servants that operate like a black box.

and one last thing, not related to checks and balances - EU itself moves at glacial pace and is resistant to change by design - which would be perfectly fine for just a Trade Union. Unfortunately it leads to it both not reacting in time, and pushing initiatives that are already outdated.

Including EC, and MEP themselves.