owenversteeg

It's because we have open primaries in the US - registering as a Democrat or Republican is only important as far as voting in primaries. In other countries the selection of candidates is internal to the political parties themselves. There are pros and cons for both systems but the US system is fairly unique globally aside from a few exceptions in South America.

Wow. I contributed to Reveal.js years ago… some features, some bug fixes, some broader browser support; nothing too crazy but it took time and energy and effort, and now Opus makes its own, just as a side item in a larger project… That’s a strange feeling.

A counterexample to the Jacobian Conjecture - and also a counterexample to “AI will never be smarter than humans.” Even the most dyed-in-the-wool AI hater at this point must acknowledge that it is more intelligent than any human. The other day I found out that Fable could read seal script! The small seal, standardized stuff no prob, but I found it even did OK at the hardest you can get, Warring States regional scripts. That’s something maybe 2,000 academics worldwide can do and nobody’s even talking about it because it’s just one more item in a very long list.

It’s a strange feeling, to be overtaken by our own creation. Top dog for millions of years and then in the blink of an eye we go from “how many Rs in strawberry” to this.

This, like the linked article by the same author ("America Doesn't Have the Stomach for Growth") raises a few interesting points but doesn't have a strong central thesis. If I could summarize this article, the main thrusts are 1) it's too technically complex, 2) the margins are thin, 3) there are strong regulatory requirements, and 4) opportunity cost vs. AI and chips. Anyone that knows Chinese modern manufacturing knows that is an incredibly weak argument overall.

On technical complexity, China _has_ a more technically complex engine, totally domestic! The WS-15 is a _more_ difficult engine to make. It runs hotter, has an afterburner and variable nozzle... and it is made virtually entirely domestically; yes, including the turbine blades that the author wastes two pages reassuring you only the West can make.

On thin margins... this is laughable. The CCP loves to subsidize strategically industries in six million ways and it is _really_ good at it. Way better than any Western government. Talk about efficient use of gov't money, the CCP will get you high quality engineers, raw materials, a captive market, whatever you need. Negative margins do not bother them one iota.

On strong regulatory requirements... China has a massive domestic market, a physically large country and several strong allies / client states. International requirements are irrelevant to start and once they have proven performance in their markets they can get them anyway.

On opportunity costs... this is the least weak of the arguments. I would argue that 1) China has enough top talent to go around, 2) even in a post-AI world jet engines are useful, and 3) it's clearly a priority of Xi Jinping and thus this whole discussion is irrelevant. That said, there is something to this argument and I would be interested to read a political/strategic analysis on this topic.

Overall, this and Aakash's other articles seem like starting with a conclusion then grasping at random factoids to defend it. If I might give advice to the author: try writing with a strong central thesis.

I think the strongest example by far is nuclear power. We could have used it for everything from energy to warfare to transport to space exploration, and instead we limited our use because the societal costs were too high. Unlike the other examples people cited here, there often isn't a better alternative or a technical reason not to use it. In 2026 nukes are still the best way to destroy your enemies or travel at any appreciable fraction of C or power a ship and the reason we don't do those things is purely societal.

The US isn't a monolith and neither is Europe. Overall, yes, the US uses more chlorine than Europe, but Spain and France both have _minimum_ water chlorination levels (about 0.2-0.3 mg/L depending on the regional situation) and France has no cap on max chlorine, which is very different from the US, where you can drink completely unchlorinated water in countless places around the country and there is a nationwide cap of 4 mg/L. For example NYC (average 0.5 mg/L and many places with zero.)

The US is a huge country. In general it has excellent water; the US averages better than the EU. The Environmental Performance Index is a report that measures many things, and they have a handy section where they measure DALYs lost from sanitation and drinking water. For this section the US scores 96, within a few points of Switzerland (100), Sweden (97), Austria (96), Denmark (94), Belgium (93) and comfortably above the Netherlands (91), France (88), Poland (80), Czechia (79) and Japan (78.)

There are isolated incidents of poor water quality in each of those countries, and especially in small towns of eight hundred people in rural areas, but generally speaking, clear drinking water that is free of bacteria is standard.

I've accidentally made one of these; I broke X on an old thinkpad with Arch and never bothered to fix it.

The problem for me is getting myself to actually use it. Most of the time, it sits there gathering dust. If anyone has tips for this I'd love to hear them.

Oh come on. Weed use and addiction has absolutely surged since legalization everywhere I'm aware of - US states, Canada, other countries etc. Use everywhere / anytime / as a part of daily life has been completely normalized, it's not uncommon to see people hitting a weed vape in the middle of a work day. Not to mention the potency is far higher and this has been normalized, so one incidence of cannabis use is essentially a mind-blasting wave of THC vs. a casual joint with friends. It would be as if you went from say 12% of Canadians having two beers after work to a fifth of vodka. That the median casual dose in 2026 would have the median casual user in 2016 literally incoherent is undisputed among any weed smoker today.

>The relevant thing that link actually says is that more survey respondents admitted to cannabis use after legalization, the obvious problem being that before legalization they would be admitting to a crime, which will suppress response rates.

Sure, except Canada had legal medicinal weed since 2001 and everyone was aware that police attitudes towards it were very lax. There were even technically-illegal weed stores that the Canadian government took years to shut down. The number of people that lied to a pollster because they thought that the government would get them was almost certainly minimal. The fact that the trend is pretty smooth before/after the boundary confirms this.

Hi Liz, I appreciate you coming here to comment, and the modifications to the article. I also appreciate the public documents.

Looking at the differences between the M5 Macbook Pro vs E14 Gen 7 I still don't quite feel that the scoring is fair. It is true that the battery is more difficult to replace and the memory/storage are soldered in the Mac. However, the soldered ports for the Thinkpad are a pretty big downside. I bet that if you surveyed regular users, they would be more likely to prefer replaceable ports to upgradeable memory/storage. The battery replacement also does not seem terribly difficult on the Mac; most of the repair guide is about Apple's neurotic use of torque drivers and adhesive activators. If you are happy with the build quality and durability of modern Thinkpads, these steps are entirely unnecessary.

I suspect a substantial factor in the scoring is Apple's fasteners - the drivers for which, of course, are now in every electronics repair kit in the world, not to mention typically included for free with replacement parts on Amazon. Is this really worth a substantial hit to Apple's scores?

Thank you for the interesting comment.

I think that determining a leader is usually far more clear cut. The EU and its bureaucratic-media apparatus love to find abstractions and subjective ways to discuss and measure things, but in reality you can measure production in objective terms. The EU is about 3-5% of global shipbuilding tonnage vs. China's 50-70%. Similarly, China produces 54% of the world's steel and 59% of the world's aluminum; the EU produces 7 and 4% respectively. China has 72% of the wind capacity installed and 4 of the 5 top turbine manufacturers. They similarly dominate numbers for trains (track laid, total HSR track, rolling stock built) and electric motors (market share of drone motors, motor components, EV traction motors, for industrial electric motors the EU and US are at about a quarter of the world market vs. China at 35-40%.)

There are a few areas where things are more subjective. Medical equipment, pharma and high-voltage, I could see a case for current EU ties and I appreciate your perspective.

Aircraft is certainly for the US, though. The EU really only has Airbus and Leonardo. Nobody would disagree that the US wins by far for: fighters, stealth, UAVs, transport, business jets, experimental, VTOL, long range bombers, and yes, helicopters. You cannot compare the US (over 2,000 Black Hawks in the Army alone) to the EU (100 Black Hawks) - the EU has a lot of lightly armed utility helicopters, the US has a massive array of everything from stealth, attack, logistical etc. Yes, sure, Leonardo can design a cool light utility copter, but that is infinitely easier and far less significant than an attack or stealth helicopter. The EU's attempts at serious helicopters (NH90, Airbus Tiger) are mostly a joke. Unless you want to count the AW129? War breaks out, how many of those can Italy send? ...4?

The picture with submarines is similar. The US has an expeditionary nuclear submarine force that can operate around the globe. The EU can do minor regional things, poorly. The Gotlands are cool, but they are small and the Swedes made three (3) of them - thirty years ago.

>Oil is a commodity. You don't really gain anything technologically from producing it yourself

The benefits in peacetime may be limited to dollars, sure; in wartime it is life or death. I am no huge fan of oil but in 2026 it still makes up most of our energy and most of the things around us. I also don't see anyone seriously accusing the US economy of Dutch disease.

>As a Dane, I'm unwilling to call anything related to AnsaldoBreda "world-class"

Hah, +1 for the chuckle :) I am Dutch... ask us what we think of AnsaldoBreda!