DarkNova6

I get the sentiment, but the examples are bad. There is no "magical bar" that decides whether you have ADHD or not and it always needs to be cross checked with the wellbeing of the actual person. And much of the article is about bashing psychology which... I do resonate with, but I'd rather have more substance rather than reading accusations alone.

I know people with actual ADHD and some medication has helped them to function again and endure social exposure and even enjoy it. That doesn't change my impression that a vast amount of people see to identify with ADHD because it's currently a trend (remember the time when everybody thought they had OCD?).

Other than that, the field of psychology is constantly evolving.

There seems to be a grand motivation to fit a holographic model onto how the universe seems to behave.

I recall a popular claim several years ago that we all lived in a hologram (whatever happened to that?).

I bet this has nothing to do with string theorists trying to make their 2D models apply to actual physical observations…

Amazing. So Imdb 2.0 has become Imdb 2.0.

> Europe is continually complaining about its dependency on Chinese steel, cars, electronics and semiconductors yet their carmakers are buying cheap Chinese steel instead of European steel and European semiconductor manufacturers are preferring cheap Chinese semiconductor equipment over ASML gear.

You clearly have no idea about the value creation chain. Steel is a commodity, why shoot yourself into the foot by buying expensive one. And semiconductors are not commodities.

But I guess this logic only makes sense to a country that insists on using its own overpriced steel to save a couple jobs.

That's the decentralized nature of capitalism working as intended. Distributing resources in the most efficient way possible. Thank you invisible hand.

Wonderful writeup, I couldn't have formulated it better! Honestly, I never expected my comment to gain traction but I find it interesting that it had such resonance in both directions.

In a way I am happy I left so much to the imagination for open interpretation.

I bet they wouldn’t radicalize and elect people with bad intentions in mind.

From what I read no further EPRs are planned and they fully want to go ahead with a streamlined EPR2 design.

I think the problem of the Finns was that they really wanted energy independence and tge inly ones that were on the market were the french. No doubt the frenched used much diplomatic muscle to attract them as a first experiment.

I've seen the same thing in my family and relatives across all age groups, I doubt they understand it either.

But is this the intended maintenance duration, or the actual one? Because the construction of every EPR project has been a disaster. Construction took 20 years in Europe and 9 years in China.

Not to detract from your point, but France had a good run with nuclear energy throughout the 70s, no? They built them on mass, built them reliably and quickly, learned from project to project and had economies of scale.

And if I am not mistaken then for a long time energy prices in France were smaller than that of neighbouring countries.

But to be fair, it is difficult to tell what "profitable" means because a primary motivation has always been the development of nuclear weapons, so the true amortization is across industry and national security.

I am more and more convinced that young people have a much better understanding of technology and especially its impact on society.

You are not wrong, but I was just saying that the possibility is there. And especially for people who are despairing over bad math education I see this as a game changer. Seeing equations used to make me angry and powerless for over a decade because I felt absolutely hopeless during my studies.

They don't parrot if you know what to ask for. You can name for examples, name your own thoughts and observations and these things will often quote something related or the fact that a famous mathematician has also made this observation some point in time which then lead to the study of something else.

I am not going to study a whole book just so I can find the answer to a couple things I might never need. I like to focus on a few areas, learn everything I need to understand it, know if there are any dependencies and see what is there to discover and then move on.

I know many people get joy from learning knowledge that is not directly applicable and might never be applicable. And I know that the academic spirit would be to learn these things. But my time is seriously finite and I am not using math in my life in any fashion whatsoever other than occasional curiosity.

It's like paying for cable back in the day but you also get ads. The sheer audacity they think they can get away with because they consider themselves having a monopoly.

I think LLMs are the single best things that were invented to make mathematics accessible.

I loved mathematics when I was young and wanted to be good at it, but I got burnt so many times by teachers who could not explain even if their life depended on it.

Asking an LLM and discovering how different theories belong together and what are genuinely open questions, along with different philosophical interpretations has been a wonderful gift.

I have long accepted that Mathematics is a language where you must go "all in" because for the most parts institutions are fundamentally unable to explain it in an intuitive way. There are people who "just get it" and are blind to the struggle of people who need a different approach in learning it. There's something about the field where a generational survivorship bias has created an environment where math is mostly taught to likeminded people, who then don't see why anybody could not see the difficulties learning it.

I know this is not true everywhere, but the only reason I could finish my studies was because there are some genuinely excellent online lectures on youtube, along with massive support from friends who have already been through the ordeal.

If I had had access to an LLM, I could have actually taught myself from scratch and be more playful in learning it. And no, I am not willing to learn lots of math "for fun", I can think of better "for fun" things that actually help my profession and cater to my actual interests and not just some academic ideal.

If there is no legal guarantee that human creativity can pay off we are starving art and humanity from its inception. If ordinary people cannot participate in the act of creation, you get exactly what hollywood has become.

Sorry, but this reads like a mouthpiece exactly from those companies that benefit the most from having no copyright and I doubt your have thought this actually through.

Believe it or not but the american system isn’t exact a blueprint for actual democracy. Many democratic systems don‘t make the election of the president a vote.

Yeah. Why use a statically typed reliable language with a good ecosystem if I can also vibecode in Python.

Project Valhalla is not a JEP, it's a collection of JEPs and this is just the very first one.

Flattening has been the goal from the start, but it's simply not something that's delivered in this JEP. But even so, people should not overestimate the effect of values and flattening.

The biggest advantage will come from specialized libraries (stuff like OpenCV), and overall library enhancements (Tuples not requiring a dedicated indirection).

The tradeoff being that tearing is what enables flattening. So if you truly want the best performance (cache lines etc.) you must enable it.

But whether your data’s integrity can be broken by such must be decided by the class author.

Yes, this was the idiom in the 90s, but Escape Analysis has not proven to be powerful enough to optimize away identity.

And looking at all the edge-cases and possible data-races via tearing, declaring something as a value must be an explicit design decision that cannot be inferred by a compiler or optimizer alone.

Good technical overview, and I fully agree with the conclusion's sentiment at the end:

``` Declaring a value class is first and foremost a semantic decision. It tells our fellow programmers that its instances are defined entirely by their state and do not need identity. That clearer model is valuable in itself! The JVM’s additional freedom to optimize how those values are represented is a welcome bonus. ```

Many developers seem to think that "go value go broom", but the truth is much more nuanced and the idea should not be to think about "but performance" but to think about the nature of your underlying data. At the very least this integrates some core DDD lessons directly into language. I'm glad tearing isn't turned on by default exactly for this reason.

Java was always a language that geared itself towards making libraries easy to use, putting much faith in the library author and strong encapsulation. Now, experts can gain significantly more performance from the JVM, while more humble programmers are avoided from creating bugs they will not expect.

Which EU countries do you talk about? Because I've never seen anything like this

I was hoping for an alternative to PLSQL or stored procedures. But this isn’t about „Database Programming“, it’s a SQL replacement…

It looks like the HN hug of death has found a new victim

At this point it is not a question of whether this will happen but only when. Next to digital currencies and the yuan, Trump has successfully killed the Petrodollar.

The free influx of money, and particularly investor money that gave the US an evergreen advantage will seize. Slow at first, then more and more as time moves on.

"Most of us" is a pretty bold claim.

This is bullshit. The vast majority of CO2 is created by energy production.

The problem is systemic and blaming other people for their lifestyle choices is neither effective nor helpful and just leads to further division. It's exactly this sort of division that helps fossil companies to destroy the planet and keep making money.

I never understood this argument. With Oil & Gas you release green house gases that have been sealed away back into the air.

For methane produced by farming all components remain in a cycle. Everything released by animals eventually finds its way back to plants, which get eaten, which become exhaust of animals, etc.

This sounds to me more like a spin by big oil to finger point at another industry.