embedding-shape

Why would this even affect you, even if you lived in France? Did you just assume this was about residential download traffic somehow?

What on earth is going on in this comment section? Seems like it's 99% of Americans who obviously didn't read the session notes themselves, or even any background information in English, before commenting on this with their least charitable reading. I don't get it, why?

If you don't understand the thing, probably because you haven't spent even 2 minutes looking up information about it, why comment about some scenario you don't even know if it applies or not? Like what's the point, just to spread FUD for the fun of it?

I can't remember if it was the FBI or NSA or the exact details, but in the beginning of this year, they did runs a bunch of commands against compromised routers to "secure" them, which effectively would count as "hacking routers" were they not whitehackers. I think there was some huge Russian MITM campaign they disrupted by effectively hacking people's routers.

Their job is quite literally to sit in sessions and discuss potential laws, this is what us taxpayers give them money to do. It's not embarrassing to talk about whatever laws, regardless of how stupid because again, this is their job, they're evaluating things.

It'd be embarrassing if they'd actually make this as-is into law, which for obvious reasons wouldn't happen right now, but that hasn't happened yet.

Just like it's not embarrassing for a software developer to write code that has bugs, this happens even to the best of us. What would be embarrassing, would be to have that code deployed as-is to production, with bugs, that's the part we should be vigilant about.

Is everyone you know able to classify a business they run from their home connection as being a "content provider"? That's crazy, I know one person/entity who'd be considered as such.

Judging by the comments here, every single French person runs a CDN at home? What am I missing, or are people completely misunderstanding what this tax is targeting?

It's not even clear yet if this would include self-hosted stuff like if you host a website for your FOSS project or a Tor relay. What news website you got that from, as the linked session notes doesn't clarify that at all.

The objective seems to be to target fournisseurs de contenu (content providers), and the mentioned collection mechanism identifies a entreprise émettrice (sending company). Also, they talk about "turnover" mattering as well, so if you don't charger people, another reason this might not affect you at all. If neither of those apply, like you hosting a website for a FOSS project, it's unlikely you'd have to pay this tax.

But, this is based on reading the session notes themselves, not news article. I'm happy to be corrected if I misunderstood anything.

He means the part he's quoted with the ">" symbol.

It's not obvious that housing "tech powerhouses" is a good thing. I mean look at the US, and how much problems all these companies bring to society. I'm also not sure we'd want anything like that in Europe or EU, if we also need to accept the same consequences as the US did.

> I feel like this is... a bit too much, no? Particularly the cellular part. I see the appeal of staying off the grid, but people with families would certainly struggle with this. Not to mention the many inconveniences this would bring about.

Similarly, I think for people who are stuck in prison in Burkina Faso, I think much of this things also don't apply, as they don't have the freedom to chose if they want cellular service or not, if we're going through scenarios where all of those things might not apply :)

It's a shared personal experience, it is what it is? I don't think author is advocating that everyone in every circumstance should try to emulate all of those things. You read it, build your opinion, then learn from what you found useful and ignore the rest. If something would be impossible because of your personal circumstance, then you can just not think about that.

> made self-hosting the entire stack (or parts of it!) incredibly easy

Back when you first launched, I thought running a knot was already pretty easy :) Could you expand on how it's different now, and what part(s) aren't now easy to self-host, if there is any?

> It does give you (or anybody) the ability to index this data independently, and not miss messages -- which AP doesn't afford. Different tradeoffs!

Someone (or some group) could also in theory go fully content-addressing with their data store, and make content available based on their hash, effectively layering that missing benefit on top of the existing architecture. Someone could probably vibecode this together in some hour(s) :)

> Full alerts for everything create alarm fatigue.

Agree, I don't think any country has "full alerts" for "everything", Spain certainly doesn't, although currently they're over-warning for the rain rather than the opposite, as "the opposite" last time ended up in a large catastrophe. I get it.

> Based in the description of levels for EU-Alert, Spain could be using it wrong

Shouldn't you first read descriptions about how Spain is using it actually, before arriving at such conclusions? Seems you're building this point of view based on anecdotes, mine included.

In the spirit of what we're discussing here, shouldn't you actually validate and verify before you share this at large?

Probably the same amount of users who actually care about figuring out how well a model works for their use cases, instead of what amounts of guessing.

Most companies I've consulted for when it comes to LLM usage in various ways all have their own evaluations, not sure why others would avoid them.

This is to save time, for what it's worth. Doing that testing and evaluation will take you MUCH longer than doing so automatically, for obvious reasons.

> I am NOT taking a high speed train in Spain ever.

You're still much safer taking the train than a car, even in Spain, even in 2026. So good luck flying everywhere, as that seems to be the only safer transportation mode :)

And even when taking the car in Spain, you're about half as likely to be in a mortal accident compared to taking the car in the US, so depending on what you're comparing with, you might be safer in Spain regardless of what transportation method you use.

To be fair, these messages we receive about impeding heavy rainfall links to the weather service which does group things into yellow/orange/red warnings, so you can see if it's actually so important or not.

But yeah, this is after the "EVERYBODY IS ABOUT THE DIE" sound alarm that triggers on everyone's phone at the same time, then you get see that they're warning about an orange weather warning, or something like that.

Is it ideal? Not really, but better than nothing. In Maresme-area we have serious flood-risk almost every time it rains, as it fucking pours when it rains, and the warnings seemingly actually save lives today.

Because people, for some stupid reasons, still read and make decisions by these public benchmarks, which makes zero sense. Create your own benchmarks and evaluations, then use those, it's pretty the only way to get any qualitative answers to how well a model will work for you and your user cases.