mikaeluman

Finland did the right thing with nuclear.

We have an election in Sweden tomorrow. The current government have started securing investments in clean energy (i.e nuclear energy).

Some opposition parties, including the "greens" (MP) are vehemently opposed to it.

Even if you support "helping struggling people" to pay their groceries. There are already programs for this such as SNAP. Basically means-tested programs that try to benefit people in need.

There are many ways to do redistribution for purposes of social welfare without actually competing with retailers that actually live on slim margins.

That doesn't give you as spectacular political ads or showmanship, however.

Take the case of "city owned stores" to "combat food price inflation".

Well. The city does not actually produce food. Stores get their produce from wholesalers. This is where the "city stores" will get them as well. Only now, regular stores know the city will undercut them in price using taxpayer money. So any location next to a city store will become poison. And soon all you will have (for some people) are the city stores.

Of course, with prices much cheaper than in other parts, you will likely get crowding at these stores. Leading to the infamous bread lines of the Soviet Union or Venezuela or what have you. Basically, if something is cheaper than the market price, you get shortages.

Ironically, the city sets prices based on a relative level to "normal stores". So it's not as if this is some "good capitalist competition". It's not as if it's a "temporary measure until catastrophe A is over".

There is put simply no way this experiment ends in a way that is positive for New Yorkers. And yes, this is socialism and there are very logical, rational economic reasons for why it always fail. This will be no different.

Wow...

I am currently using bun, but may have to switch. I can't see how this can possibly turn out well in the long run...

I honestly think it breaks down. Because you and the LLM start speaking different languages.

So when you try to direct future work, you have to contend with the "pluggable policies in every seam" and be aware of the "reduced blast radius by context testability".

Just does not compute.

I don't get it. The skills and instruction try to make the answer more machine like on purpose.

Not humanising it...

People want the terse, matter-of-fact output. Not the conversational chatty verbose and bloated nonsense with gray words and jargon and terms like "blast radius"

You are simply wrong.

The whole of life, plants and animals - depend on the "cutsy" parts.

Basic atmospheric science.

Sorry I thought my point was clear.

Grazing animals are part of a cycle. Any methane from digestion is broken down in the atmosphere and bound again to plant life and recycled. This is vastly different from drilling rock and letting out new carbon into the atmosphere at a drastic rate.

That goes to my second point; if you keep cows (or other animals) and feed them grain, and use artificial fertilizer and add other fossil-fuel dependent machinery on top of that - yes then that becomes a problem.

But it is mainly a problem if e.g. the population of cows drastically increases. In Europe and North America, it has decreased since at least the 50s; increasing in other parts of the world.

So regardless of the downvotes - "we have to stop eating red meat due to co2" is way too simplistic.

Meat, and red meat, is truly a miracle food. Dense in nutrients, satiating and of course tasty.

Nature needs animals as well. In fact it is essential.

Agricultural reform or innovation is certainly an avenue to explore; but this strange obsession with "stop eating red meat" is a bit too much.

The headline should state this is about electricity generation.

If you compare e.g. with a country like Sweden or France they have been free from fossil fuels for electricity since the build outs in the 70s-80s.

Also Germany is an importer of significant electricity (e.g nuclear power from France).

But due to a stagnant economy and no increase in electricity demand - yes, I guess this milestone is now passed...

Indeed. Rather than deal with it, there will just be some shell company in non EU they can export to and have it destroyed there...

Though that will obviously incur a larger cost than today.

Most everyone would love to see more work on stopping child sexual abuse.

But this is the ultimate "grant me dictatorial powers so I can do good" play.

Rather than narrow and specific - it's a broad based law that suddenly touches everyone even though offenders are a small percentage and should be able to be targeted more efficiently.

I recently took over an old house and plot of land not used for ~20 years.

In that time, the main lawn is still grass dominated and fairly easy to cut. But many areas have become completely swamped with different bushes and willow.

I cut it all down twice per year but it shoots up like a jungle next year anyway.

Parts of old farm tracks have of course become unrecognizable and are slowly turning into a forest.

It's hard and tough to walk, you can't see properly as plants can grow quite tall (plus elevation differences).

I love plants; but for human enjoyment and passage between different areas on a plot of land; grass is superior. I dream of grass.

There is no prosperity without stable and cheap energy.

Great news, just hoping the people understand this as well.

It makes sense that you need the best engineers to do the labelling. But the story very much sounds like a panic move.

"Things are going so fast and we need to catch up. Yesterday."

But you still have humans working for you. I doubt these label people are putting in their best efforts...