voidr

Emigration or fleeing is not desertion, if you leave a country before being part of the army, you have fled the country but you did not desert. You have to be part of a military unit to have the ability to desert.

You can look at Ukrainian sources about the desertion problem, there are videos of actual Ukrainian soldiers and commanders talking about this, they made laws around this issue.

> Russia's entire army is in shambles, Ukraine is executing areal attacks against Russian fucking air defence with Cessna "rockets", and that works! There's reports, with video of Russia's army having entirely run out of equipment, using golf carts as armored vehicles.

> And yes, Ukraine works by the general tactic of retreating 100 meters leaving a trap, having Russia sacrifice WAY too much dealing with the trap, retreating another 100 meters.

So are the maps that I'm looking at all fake(including the Ukrainian ones) or the Russian army that is in shambles is till beating the Ukrainian army?

> As for the money, aside from the amount quoted being bullshit

The 100bn came from Zelensky, so is he saying bullshit?

> the 150 billion dollars that US + EU loaned combined

I'm pretty sure the US alone has sent more than 150, but it doesn't matter because it would make the situation look even worse.

> trade for destroying the Russian army

For a destroyed army they are gaining a lot of ground, I'm afraid to even think about what would a not-destroyed Russian army would be capable of.

> be repaid by the Ukrainian government. 70% or so is a direct stimulus for the US economy, paid by Ukraine, if they win

Even if they win, they won't have an economy to pay it back.

> It would be cheap even if it was a gift to Ukraine, but it's not.

It is a gift because the likelihood of Ukraine ever paying it back is one the same level of Hawk Tuah Coin gaining back it's value. It's not cheap because it didn't accomplish much.

> By contrast, just the Russian actions in the Baltic seas, cutting internet cables are estimated to cost 2+ billion.

You do realise that the Baltic sea is far away from Ukraine and even if Russia loses the war they can still send submarines there right?

---

I recommend you look at factual accounts of what is actually happening, you can look at multiple sources to minise bias and you should be open to the possibility that your favourite news outlets might not be completely honest with the way they are presenting things because their reporting does not line up with all the facts.

Even if I accept all your beliefs about Putin and Russia, I can still say that most of the money given was wasted compared to spending it on the European side of NATO.

Your comment is misinformed, you are unfamiliar with the UK context here, but even if your comment would be correct, 200/6 = 33 EUR that would most definitely plug that black hole, however that is not what the comment is about, please look at the actual context before commenting.

Well except that 200 000+ who did not feel like sacrificing themselves for a media stunt like Kursk or Krynky and decided to desert.

Zelensky doesn't know where at least 100bn went, that's over half the amount they were given by the US, we didn't even ask about the EU funds.

You can also look at a map and see that we are giving them money and they are losing ground, it's not working.

Many very costly things happen if we forget the Afghanistan lesson, where an insane amount money was plowed into a military riddled with corruption that folded without a fight once the US abandoned the area. On paper the Afghan forces were more numerous and better equipped, in reality most of those soldiers collected their pay checks and went home.

The UK is also sending eye-watering amounts of money to Ukraine without a problem, while everyone else is pulling out of the project.

There was also the plan go give the Chagos islands to a country that is ~2000km away and pay them billions for the privilege of using them.

There is always money to chase newspaper headlines.

> People that call themselves "full stack"are a backend developer that dabbles in frontend or a front end developer that can dabble on the backend. Almost never have a met a person who was equally good at both.

Full stack developer here who disagrees. Most web apps are not that complicated and if there are the term 'backend developer' will be replaced with something more specialised as well.

> the backend story for me is still weaker than using Python or elixir, etc simply serving an API

That is a very odd statement, Python has a lot of issues that NodeJS never had, in terms of developer experience I believe NodeJS is superior just based on the fact that I don't need to know what a virtual environment is and I don't need to choose between different incompatible package managers before I even write my first line of code.

> if you are building a company, 9 times out of 10 you are going to have to have an API anyways. I like to have the boundary of that API explicit.

If the only consumer of the API is your frontend, why would you want to have such a strong boundary?

> the only exception to the above is if you aren't building a company and instead working on a small personal or group project.

This statement can easily be hard countered by the rise of full stack frameworks like NextJS and the fact that the whole backend-frontend separation didn't always exist, it mainly happened because of SPAs.

I agree with you that it's awful that a lot of young developers wouldn't be able to program without React.

I would like to add as someone would has no problems working without any library that the DOM is one of worst APIs ever invented by humankind and that "reactive programming" is a superior model to what we used to do before.

That being said: - NextJS rolled back years of tooling improvements, it's much slower than Vite - I just statically built a NextJS and a page that has no interactivity downloads 100KB of JS to do nothing with it - Facebook decided to make a "compiler" for React instead of just not pointlessly re-rednering components by default - Compared to Preact which is almost a drop in replacement, React is huge! This shows how little Facebook cares.

The GDPR could have worked, though they chickened out in the last moment and designated the US as "safe"(the whole point was to keep the data local), they also allowed countries to interpret the GDPR in such an extreme way that it's now impossible to install security cameras in certain countries like Hungary.

The cookie law made me think that most people in the EU who make these laws need help turning on their computer.

I actually agree with parts of the Digital Markets Act, I should have the freedom to install whatever software I want on my iPad which is crippled by the App Store limitation, it makes my blood boil when I think about the fact that my iPad has a better CPU then my developer laptop, yet I can't run anything on it, because nanny Apple doesn't want me to. We'll see if it will work out though, I don't have high hopes.

I always say that the EU should look at parts of the US that are successful with an open mind and try to understand what's missing, because we have the talent that's not the issue, there is also money in Europe but for some reason I don't feel like I'm going to be building the next Google here. London got pretty close, but the UK decided to Brexit.

I agree that the EU should not try to create innovation, they should just create the conditions necessary for it.

The US also has bureaucracy issues, but it seems that there is so much investor money out there that you can just throw it at the problems to make them go away.

> The models will be developed within Europe's robust regulatory framework

I'm sure that all AI research needs is "robust regulation".

As a European, it annoys me to no end that Brussels bureaucrats think they know and understand everything and they can regulate everything, the only thing they are achieving is making sure that AI companies will avoid forming in the EU, because nobody wants to be at a disadvantage compared to the rest of the world, sure eventually they will provide service to the EU countries, but we will never have our own industry.

The EU needs to stop having pencil pushers make decisions on things they have no clue about and somehow get people who know what they are talking about to make the choices.

> one that won’t sit back and let opportunities slip through its fingers

Maybe they should fix the economy to attract more AI companies and researchers instead, while they are at it they can fix the police force as well to give confidence to said companies and researchers.

The lack of data centers is not the reason I'm not researching AI at the moment, I can buy the hardware or rent a US data center, the reason is that the UK economy is dead, borrowing is insanely expensive and taxes are so high that most of the profits would go to the government, which would be fine if it would spend it on things that matter, but it's not doing that, it's just buying votes.

As someone who has been running a short term rental in an apartment building for over 6 years, I would ask: were there any genuine attempts to reconcile from either parties?

I myself had some troubles as well, but it didn't look impossible to run a short stay and keep the peace at the same time.

Hiring agents have been spamming potential job seekers for years with garbage and then came up with the abomination known as ATS, which makes it very difficult to argue that job seekers should not use automation.

Either the market needs to come up with a good solution that encourages good behavior from both sides or the governments can step in and start regulating.

> I’ve realized that in my current phase of life, everything needs to work seamlessly

I have an almost 10 years old MacBook Pro, that I can turn on at any time and I would be able to do modern software development on it easily.

I have a similarly aged high end gaming laptop, I turn it on it spends two hours fiddling with software updates, turns on the anti-virus that I never asked for, installs random software that I would never in a million years install, maybe breaks a driver or two on bigger updates and to top it all off, even with WSL2 I can't even get Docker to run things reliably on it.

For gaming I find the Steam Deck to be the superior experience.

Maybe I'm old fashioned but a nightclub with hopefully security cameras would be the last place I would go for privacy and "free expression".

When I go to theaters they usually just tell me to turn off my phone or don't take pictures. It has the same weight because people who wouldn't listen would just take the sticker off easily.

If you would have paid attention to my comment you would know that my issue is not social signalling, my issue is getting glue on my phone for a childish reason.

I don't like the idea of having to clean the glue off my phone because the club is more concerned about people making fools out of themselves in public more than being concerned about my private property, it is sending the wrong message.

What do you think should happen instead?

According to the government this inheritance tax change can end up generating at most £0.4-0.5 billion, which does nothing for its over £1,100 billion spending, there is no monetary justification for this change, only contempt for a class of people who work hard and earn next to nothing(in the UK).

I personally see inheritance tax itself being a deeply immoral construct, your estate was made out of money that was already taxed multiple times by multiple different types of taxes, instead of you being able to pass your hard earned wealth to your heirs, the state takes it away. If you owned a house your children might be forced to sell it because the tax on it could be 40%, if you got as mortgage in your early 30s, you probably paid it off in your early 70s which is close to the life expectancy of 78 if you are a man, so technically, you didn't really own anything and you were just a slave to the state.

> If Europe manages to handle their situation, then they will be in advance as compared to the US. Because the US will also most certainly reach a point were their fossil resources go down.

The problem is that it's hard to handle the situation if our economy is collapsing and we have no way to produce the stuff that would help us be less reliant on fossil fuel.

> Which means that we need to organize our society to do less with less. Doesn't necessary mean less happiness (if we do it right). But less consumerism for sure.

We can't even heat our homes without burning natural gas, some people use heating oil, some burn wood while many others have windows that were manufactured before I was born.

I don't think there is a way out for Europe at the moment, we need to depend on at least one country which we despise, burn oil and natural gas and very slowly become more efficient and less reliant on these. I am shocked to hear these talks about net zero when we still haven't managed to insulate all the homes and I don't think we are getting closer by destroying our economies as a matter of fact I'm certain that if you give people a few cold winters their favourite song might become "drill baby drill".

It would be amazing if we could transition from fossil fuels to clean energy overnight because it sucks that we don't have our own source of oil, however at the moment it's as realistic as the Hyperloop.

We can inch towards clean energy, but destroying our industries does not help with that. It's very difficult to make wind farms if you don't have natural gas to heat up the iron.

Even if we would get a magical device that would generate infinite clean energy for free we would have a huge problem on our hands with the fact that everyone has gas boilers in colder countries and it's not certain if the current electrical grid could even sustain the load generated by all the new electrical heaters.

It looks to me that Europe(including UK) is having the most out of touch leaders it has ever had.

Because it will never happen due to entrenchment of the establishment or because you believe that the EU leadership were doing the right thing and the EU is going into decline despite them making 100% the right choices the whole time?

As a European I have an idea: fire the people in charge and try a different approach because clearly what they have been doing so far is not working, unfortunately they are likely going to just do more of the same things that made the EU fail before it had a chance to become superpower that can afford these inefficiencies.

I think this video says it all: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bMmboRqRe8

If we take this logic, we should get rid of JavaScript support entirely and only support WASM, which would be a direction, but it would ignore how developers are using the platform.

It is now becoming rare when I see any serious project that still uses JavaScript, everyone I know is using TypeScript and I don't recall any job posts not requiring TypeScript. What are the standards bodies doing? They are still implementing hacks upon JavaScript instead of seeing the writing on the wall.

Maintaining JS engines is difficult because of the old stuff that few developers actually use, it would make a lot more sense to start deprecating those features and adding the new ones developers actually want.

I started using alternatives to NodeJS because I don't feel like I should subject myself to a compilation step if I don't have to.

If creativity means allowing people to be creative with dangerous language features that they themselves probably don't fully understand and write code in a way that nobody else understands, then I would want none of it.

Having working and maintainable software is a lot more important than having a team member showing off what they are able to do with eval, they can put that into a demo side project.

Most of the JavaScript developers I've encountered recently refuse to use Map, and if you dare use it, they will say that it's complicated code and premature optimisation before even making an attempt to understand it.

I feel like trying to add fast data structures into JavaScript is futile, I think at this point it would be better to make it easier for JavaScript and the browser to interface with faster languages.

The only thing I would add to JavaScript at this point is first class TypeScript support so that we can ditch the transpilers.

I love simple and accessible websites as much as everyone else, but I believe this leans way too much into extremity and dictates solutions instead of requirements.

JavaScript has appeared in 1995, it's now technically impossible to use a browser that doesn't support JS, because it will fail to load the website due to its old SSL/TLS stack, worrying about JS support is just insane.

Not using JavaScript doesn't give you accessibility by default, see: <a href="/121/"><img src="abcd.jpeg"></a>

The whole article feels like it was written my someone stuck in the early 2000s, you can make a well designed and accessible SPA. Using stone age technology should not be the goal, accessibility should be the goal.

The tax section of the gov.uk domain follows these guidelines and it's a mess, other pages can also be very difficult to use.

Yeah, no superpower would ever be bothered by another superpower wanting to put bases and missiles next to them....

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

This is a work of beauty, tried to find the usual left leaning bias that is present in most models, but it seems to be cynical about everything, which is a breath of fresh air. Good job!

Having annoying banners that cost a lot of money to make doesn't solve anything. If the EU would really care, they would outlaw these practices altogether.

It is also very ironic that you have to record the consents in your database by generating a unique id for the visitors.

Having technology illiterate people making laws about tech also doesn't help.

Brave did way more for my privacy than the EU ever could.

The EU is not as altruistic as it seems, a lot of good looking policies are backed up by bad intentions.

Not having the possibility of a 3rd party app store means that you can never have an app store in the EU, where the 30% stays in the EU.

I also don't believe that the EU is doing a great job, the cookie law didn't accomplish anything other than force companies to pay monthly for a cookie banner service and waste millions. GDPR failed, it just created legal black holes and it's now fine to transfer data to the US, rendering the whole thing ineffective.

I'm an EU citizen and I'm not sure if the EU would have been so keen on USB-C if Apple would have been a company in the EU. This talk about saving the environment fades away at the first sign of economical inconvenience.