mpweiher

Yes, and?

Says nothing about (a) race or (b) citizens.

On the other hand, he specifically writes about "hard problems like cultural integration between wildly different ways of living."

So culture, not race.

So exactly as I wrote: he talks about non-citizens and you turn it into "race".

Who is the racist?

1. Whether that is OK or not is unrelated to the question of whether it is racist to revoke citizenship on non-racial grounds. Which it clearly is not. (The "...the wrong race" is purely you).

2. As far as I can see, the position that DHH referred to did not apply to naturalized citizens, but to foreigners. So non-citizens.

3. As far as I know, most countries currently have laws on the books that can result in citizenship being revoked. As an example, countries that don't allow dual citizenship will take your citizenship away if you become citizen of another country. Germany and many other countries will take your citizenship away if you lied on your application and it only comes out later. Terror and treason are also common reasons.

4. Some counties (India for example) will even take your (naturalized) citizenship away if you are out of country long enough.

That's kind of the point of conference talks.

"Here's something that I did that turned out to be helpful to my situation. Maybe you can learn something useful from it for your situation"

Where did he openly support "ethnic cleansing via remigration"?

Googling, I can find this:

https://x.com/dhh/status/1997275678555951451

Which refers to this:

https://www.bt.dk/samfund/brandfarligt-ny-maaling-viser-mass...

Both of these have a different definition of "remigration" than what you are using:

- deporting foreign nationals, not legal citizens

- deporting those foreign nationals if they have been convicted of a crime.

- nothing whatsoever to do with race, everything to do with (a) citizen status and (b) legally proven criminal behavior.

So: what you describe would be racist. What the article talks about that DHH was referring to clearly is not.

And please don't start with "dog whistle".

If you're going to accuse people of things, it does need to be them doing those things, not you interpreting.

If you can present clear evidence of him supporting actual ethnic cleansing, so not something that you somehow interpret as being equivalent, I am with you.

The return of the Transputer.

Put a Transputer in a Lego brick. Not "like a Lego brick", an actual Lego brick. Turn the notches into connectors for the serial link.

Plug'n'play.

So essentially React Native but with the code not left in TypeScript/JavaScript but transpiled to C++?

Which is why "data structures" probably also belong in the "variables" column.

> humans will eventually stop writing and reading code,

“Since FORTRAN should virtually eliminate coding and debugging…” -- FORTRAN report, 1954

http://www.softwarepreservation.org/projects/FORTRAN/BackusE...

Is it just me or are local models getting better (catching up) a lot faster than the frontier models are getting better (creating distance)?

If true, that would be a very welcome development.

Tried the app. Just gives me the error message "Failed to decode Homebrew JSON output".

   ]brew -v 
   Homebrew 7.0.1

So prescient.

Time for alternatives?

Sure!

To start:

An operating system is a collection of things that don’t fit into a language. There shouldn’t be one.

— Dan Ingalls, https://www.cs.virginia.edu/~evans/cs655/readings/smalltalk....

Let's start with an example, the Objective-Smalltalk equivalent of Python's simple web-server for a directory.

Python:

    python3 -m http.server 8000

This serves the current directory on port 8000. The invocation for the Objective-Smalltalk script doing the equivalent job looks as follow:

   ./simplefileserver.st ./ 8000 

Here is the Objective-Smalltalk 'simplefileserver.st' script:

   #!env st
   #-server: <ref>dir port: <int>port
   framework:ObjectiveHttpd load.
   dir asScheme waitOnPort: port.

If you look carefully, you'll notice that this doesn't actually say anything about the filesystem. It just expects an argument 'dir' that is a 'ref' and then goes from there.

Here are some other example of what a "ref" can be:

   ./simplefileserver.st https://objective.st 8000
   ./simplefileserver.st sftp://otherhost.local 8000
   ./simplefileserver.st env: 8000
   ./simplefileserver.st defaults: 8000
   ./simplefileserver.st class: 8000
   ./simplefileserver.st scheme: 8000

The first will make this server act like an http proxy, the second will serve a remote directory, the third will serve our environment variables, the fourth will serve the contents of our process's defaults database (a macOS/iOS thing), the fifth our classes and the sixth the contents of the scheme registry where all the other schemes listed so far are registered.

"Ref" is anything referencable by a polymorphic identifier, a slightly adapted version of a URI. And any ref can be turned into a store (aka "scheme-handler"). And a store can be literally anything that can store and retrieve data by key/index/name/path, from local variables via filesystems, databases all the way to the World Wide Web.

So you can see that you can get the same location transparency that Plan 9 gives you without requiring operating system support. Which comes in handy when you can't switch to a new operating system. What's more, the support extends to a lot of things even Plan 9 probably wouldn't consider a filesystem (local variables?). Last not least, this does not require accessing everything via POSIX API and a byte-serialized representation. Definitely not "least"!

You can access via a byte-serialized representation (as via the http server above) if you want, and you can even access via POSIX API (there is a generic fileserver that serves any of these stores / scheme handlers) if you really, really want. I am not at all sure why you would want that.

And you can, of course, also access this via any language that can talk to C as the libraries that implement the functionality are written in portable Objective-C. Objective-Smalltalk just provides the proper linguistic support.

I think there is a good case to be made for these things not to be mediated by the operating system by default.

In Objective-Smalltalk[1], I can access a file as follows:

   hello ← file:hello-world.txt 

This is structurally the same way I would access a local variable, environment variable, database, remote http server etc.

   hello ← https://example.com/hello-world.txt
   hello ← env:GREETING
   hello ← var:greeting         //   hello defaults to var:hello

etc.

And you can also introduce shortcuts

   scheme:greeter ← ref:https://example.com/ asScheme.
   hello ← greeter:hello-world.txt

Or

   scheme:greeter ← ref:file:./ asScheme
   hello ← greeter:hello-world.txt

Sending -asScheme to a reference is just a shorthand that actually constructs a composition[2] of a "path relative" store with the underlying store of the original reference. So the following two are identical:

   scheme:greeter ← ref:https://example.com/ asScheme.
   scheme:greeter ← #MPWRelativeScheme{ base: 'https://example/com' } → #MPWURLSchemeResolver{} 

This composition mechanism can be carried further with post-processing, so for example an img-scheme can be constructed by composing an image-decoder store with the previous store

   scheme:img ← #MPWImageDecoderStore{} → scheme:greeter 
   helloPic ← img:wave.png 

And so on and so forth, caching is also a nice example.

[1] https://objective.st

[2] https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3359591.3359729

Have a look at Objective-Smalltalk[1][2], with polymorphic identifiers[3] (all identifiers are URIs), storage combinators[4] (virtual filesystems on steroids), and polymorphic write streams[5] (streams everywhere).

Objective-Smalltalk basically provides the sorts of things you write about locally at the language level. You could also move specific instances behind an operating system boundary.

[1] https://objective.st

[2] https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3689492.3690052

[3] https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2508168.2508169

[4] https://2019.splashcon.org/details/splash-2019-Onward-papers...

[5] https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3359619.3359748

To me the "Europe now has sovereign access" line by the CEO is a bit of hype, though technically it is true if you view Europe geographically, as he seems to do.

Andøya Spaceport has been a place for suborbital/sounding rockets, this is the first time a rocket has been launched into orbit from there.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andøya_Space

> I don't have answers to your other questions as I'd ask them too.

They were questions to you, as it is you making various weird claims.

1. Who is "they"? Isar Aerospace and Arianespace are distinct entities.

2. Isar Aerospace is the first fully private European company (a startup) to do this. Arianespace and the Ariane rockets have heavy state/ESA involvement.

3. It is the first launch to orbit from geographically European soil. French Guiana is politically part of France, but geographically obviously part of South America.

4. Why would everyone have to launch from the same place, in your esteemed opinion? Why are some US payloads launched from California, some from Florida, and soon some from Texas and Louisiana?

5. Are all launch locations equally suitable for all orbits? Are all orbits equally suitable for all missions?

6. Norway is a lot closer to the rest of Europe than French Guiana is.

7. Why was SpaceX newsworthy, particularly on a startup-centric site, when NASA already exists?

I doubt that HN user yostrovs is Trump.

So you are opposed to self-determination. Glad we cleared that up.

Who then gets to decide? You?

> Does French Guyana have a usable space rocket?

Yes: the Ariane rockets. "French Guyana" is part of France, which is part of the EU.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Guiana

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariane_(rocket_family)

I think people overestimate the effect of representation of specific programming languages or frameworks.

I had Codex or Claude create simple web apps for me in Objective-Smalltalk. And it did a good job.

I am pretty sure that Objective-Smalltalk web apps are so underrepresented in the training set as to be almost or even actually nonexistent.

> can result in new plants if the private actors starts to invest

It is the private investors seeking approvals. Why would they do this if they didn't want to build? After all, these types of approvals and application processes also cost money. Are they doing this just for fun?

> but there is a large difference between that and actually building new plants.

Well yes: what is happening now are the required prerequisites to actually building. Can't really start building without having done these things first.

Not sure what you're trying to say here? They can only be taken seriously if they skip the necessary first steps?

> the new government can easily just withdraw those offers of state aid and change the legislation to make it unprofitable to invest into new nuclear power plants.

That was one of the changes: there is now an insurance mechanism that compensates investors if the state pulls the plug on them.

Which goes back to the point of the state being the biggest risk factor for nuclear projects.

> The proof is as always in what get actually get constructed

The proof for construction. The proof for intent and investor interests is now.

Next step happened just today:

Studsvik, GE Vernova Hitachi and Samsung C&T commit to advancing 1.2 GW nuclear power project in Sweden

https://news.cision.com/studsvik-ab/r/studsvik--ge-vernova-h...

Again, these news are coming out almost on a weekly basis. Yes, not a finished power plant, yet, but also very very far from nothing.

> Not according to the standard statistic for electricity generation cost - LCOE

According to the IEA it is. If you think nuclear LCOE is high, then you probably looked at the Lazard data. But Lazard themselves say that their figures for nuclear are not representative and that they did not try to make them representative.

Here is the Vice Chairman for Energy at Lazard:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16HVh_Fx6LQ

“We do not, in this study, try to cost out new nuclear” (2:35)

“We think nuclear will be a big part of the future” (2:47)

“the costs of nuclear should go down “ (12:54)

“next five to 10 years the nuclear bar the one that's most likely to change the most in in terms of cost reduction” (14:06)

If you look at other sources than Lazard, for example the IEA, you will find that even nuclear LCOE is low.

However, LCOE is actually not the correct metric, as it only covers the cost of producing electricity from that source. It doesn't capture the cost of intermittent sources, which have very high system costs due to their intermittency.

Levelized Full System of Electricity (LFSCOE) is what you need to look at that, and there nuclear does well and intermittent are generally horrible, and they get worse the more of them you have. So you need to balance intermittent with stable providers like nuclear. And no, batteries are not sufficient, except maybe in the Sahara.

Here is the Finnish environment minister:

""If we consider the [consumption] growth figures, the question isn't whether it's wind or nuclear power. We need both," Mykkänen said at a press conference on Tuesday morning.

He added that Finland's newest nuclear reactor, Olkiluoto 3, enabled the expansion of the country's wind power infrastructure. Nuclear power, he said, is needed to counterbalance output fluctuations of wind turbines."

https://yle.fi/a/74-20136905

> [Nuclear power plants] are not cheap to run.

Yes they are. One counterexample does not disprove this, even if it were a valid counterexample, which it is not.

Wholesale prices that don't include various externalities are not a valid counterexample.

> Storage is the holy grail here. That allows for more provision of wind and solar.

Storage makes the already expensive intermittent renewables even more expensive.

Germany has the highest electricity costs among the G20.

https://www.zeit.de/wirtschaft/2026-08/strompreise-g20-deuts...

And that's with still quite a lot of coal and ever more gas in the grid, both for the plenty of times the intermittent don't deliver and for grid stability (see also: Spainout), which means we have the 3rd worst specific emissions in the EU (down from 4th worst last year), and the highest total CO₂ emissions in the EU.

After about €1 trillion spent on our "Energiewende", our "green" energy transition.

> In practice it is expensive to build, expensive to run, and really expensive to clean up.

That turns out not to be the case.

Nuclear power plants are expensive, but that's because they are big. For the amount of electricity they generate, they are cheap.

They are also quite cheap to run. As far as I know, there is no cheaper source of electricity than a nuclear power plant that has paid off its construction costs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbeJIwF1pVY

And they run for a long time, if you don't do stupid shit like ban nuclear power. The US has so far extended the operating license of every nuclear plant that has applied to 80 years, and they now thin 100 years is a realistic option.

> There's a reason they're mostly run by govts.

Most nuclear power plants in the US are privately run, last I checked. So were the nuclear power plants in Germany. In Germany, the Greens tried to force nuclear power to become uneconomical by ever stricter regulations. They failed. Nuclear power had to be outlawed.

> Private capital has no appetite for nuclear

This turns out not to be the case.

https://world-nuclear.org/net-zero-nuclear/news/internationa...

https://www.nucnet.org/news/polish-billionaire-to-invest-gbp...

Also, the hyperscalars, for example, have all invested in nuclear. The biggest risk to nuclear is governments, which is why private investors want assurances or the government on board.

> wait till you find out what fusion-on-earth costs...

What does it cost?

> We are not building any new nuclear.

?

I mean, not building yet, but a lot of new nuclear is in the pipeline.

"The Swedish government has presented a roadmap for new nuclear, stipulating that, by 2035, nuclear reactors with the capacity to produce 2500 MW should have been built, with further increases to 10 000 MW by the year 2045."

https://www.innovationnewsnetwork.com/the-case-for-new-nucle...

"A flurry of nuclear developments in Sweden—state aid, SMR selections, legislation"

https://www.ans.org/news/2026-06-18/article-8133/new-sweden-...

There appear to be new developments almost every other week.

From TFA: "What I mean by this is that I think the act of writing code manually and having other humans review it to create useful, working software is headed for extinction."

“Since FORTRAN should virtually eliminate coding and debugging…” -- FORTRAN report, 1954 [1]

And the FORTRAN report was both right and wrong. What was meant by "coding" back then, carefully crafting machine instructions from higher level specifications, was almost entirely eliminated. It was replaced by something else, which we now call coding.

[1] http://www.softwarepreservation.org/projects/FORTRAN/BackusE...

Good point!

That could explain this move away from tipping described in the article: the economic incentive has disappeared, leaving all the cultural negatives.

I always thought "paying" your staff via tips was primarily a tax dodge.

Yes, the staff are supposed to declare all their untraceable cash income, but...yeah.

So at least some of that income is untaxed, meaning higher net for same gross, meaning total prices even including tip can be lower.

There has been reporting on this in many places. Here is one:

https://packaging-journal.de/en/eu-commission-wants-to-scrap...

"According to the Händlerbund, the European Commission's proposal to abolish the requirement has been on the table since December 2025. However, discussions in the Council of the EU were suspended a few weeks ago after a majority of member states spoke out against it."

"A restricted version is currently being discussed in the European Parliament. According to this, an exemption is only to apply to micro-enterprises with up to 49 employees and an annual turnover of a maximum of 10 million euros. A first reading is scheduled for October 2026 at the earliest."