I really want to adopt the world view of this developer, but the more I read it, the more this comes across as someone relatively new to a particular industry who really doesn’t care about his job. I can empathize with part of this - who doesn’t want to live in the rat race, but this feels entitled more then questioning. That said, if his boss has a yacht, maybe there is a more money at this company then I assumed.
So where do you go, if you don’t care about growth? it feels like a government job (especially in Europe), a academic, or a factory line worker in Southeast Asia might be a better fit then software developer.
I pre-ordered and picked up a framework desktop with 128GB of DDR5-8000 inside of it. This is the type of system that is the a indirect byproduct of the change towards AI - it may not have been what AM was originally intending with the AI Max 395+ line - but it definitly is the kind of optimized thinking that will drive AI into the hands of consumers.
That's part of the reason I think this boom-bust cycle might be a bit different. Hopefully, Intel can use some of its capacity that they have coming up in the foundry to service this need.
> This is the type of system that is the a indirect byproduct of the change towards AI - it may not have been what AM was originally intending with the AI Max 395+ line - but it definitly is the kind of optimized thinking that will drive AI into the hands of consumers.
it literally was intended for exactly that, it has AI in the name of the cpu, and it was from the get go targeted at AI and GPU heavy workloads (3D rendering etc)
Depends, do you travel through any of the airports in Europe, use many of the train services in Europe, get power from spain, portugal or (non-nuclear) France? Fly on a Airbus, or a Boeing with RR engines?
There are legit reasons to be skeptical of privatization, but yes. It works well when it works.
Dogmatic responses (free market == everything, only government and unions can provide service) are not helpful.
Airbus is by all intents and purposes a (multi-)State controlled company with privatized profits. You don’t get to have hefty defense contracts in countries like Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia if you’re de facto a private company, which they aren’t.
>You don’t get to have hefty defense contracts in countries like Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia if you’re de facto a private company, which they aren’t.
This is false. Saudi Arabi buys equipment from private companies. Most US Defense contractors are private companies, of course countries all around the world buy from private companies.
The defense contracts of Airbus have nothing to do with them being partially state owned.
The first two are reasonable positions. The third, on the merits of the argument in the article, is absolutely bonkers. It's the UK government that is unleashing this stupidity on the world. There is no European alternative that is any safer, and it's the UK's own hands that are at fault in the first place.
Not that there aren't other reasons to be skeptical of American companies' right, but it's just so easy to fall into nationalistic prattle instead of fixing the real problem.
> but it's just so easy to fall into nationalistic prattle instead of fixing the real problem.
Right. This, right now, is 100% a UK problem. De-Americanising your tech stack isn't going to fix the political issues domestically. Hence Apple pulling ADP out, they made the choice of not complying with the UK and not offering the service instead of compromising the service for everyone else in the world.
UK citizens need to direct their attention inwards against their own government.
Scary stuff: they've just handed the EU a reason to go after ADP. Turns out no back door is needed, you just force their position into making ADP unavailable in the EU.
Last time I was in the UK, the news (BBC) was bizarrely 90% American politics. Trump this, Trump did that, etc. People there knew American politicians better than the people who actually represent them.
Trump is a chum with Farage, far right con man and Putin's buddy.
For the reasons unknown BBC is *massively* promoting and platforming far right in the last few times (airtime, framing of the events, promoting party lines as facts, etc).
So Trump in the BBC might be considered beneficial to the far right. This would explain it.
>The first two are reasonable positions. The third, on the merits of the argument in the article, is absolutely bonkers. It's the UK government that is unleashing this stupidity on the world. There is no European alternative that is any safer, and it's the UK's own hands that are at fault in the first place.
Disagree. Australia and also likely Canada have identical these laws. And once the capability is in place, its likely that the US can all writs access to the same tool. Apple is unique in that it has a semi legal canary, in choosing to withdraw the services instead of complying.
You cant trust any tech company that remains located in the 5 eyes nations.
I am not aware of good alternatives, but worst case you can run up a VPS with Owncloud or something.
> There is no European alternative that is any safer
How do you figure that? If you're worried about your privacy in the UK, keeping your data in a Five Eyes country cloud provider is a very bad idea, arguably even worse than keeping it in a UK cloud provider where it becomes a domestic legal matter where you at least get a day in court, not a foreign intelligence matter where you don't. And the US is a pretty bad place for anyone's data given a) its lack of robust privacy laws (and large commercial data-trafficking ecosystem) and b) the National Security Letter system.
While there is no perfect country, somewhere like Germany or the Netherlands seems a much better bet.
Which is why Airbus is around today. The amount of launch aide (including Marshall plan dollars!) that the European governments flushed into Airbus to keep them afloat for years is why they are still around.\
A quick control-F didn't find the name John Leahy. Without that part of the story, I think you really miss what took Airbus from an also-run European institution to a global force. Some of his story there is really something.
Sorry, the entire political establishment learned that debt didn't really matter back during Bush and then Obama.
How different would the world have been if either of the two "grand bargins" that Boehner started, and then Obama torpedo'd last minute (in the first example) or the second one (which biden as VP torpedo'd) happened? No rise of the tea party, working bipartisan arrangement on spending?
The tea party was a front by the Koch brothers to pay less taxes. It was and always will be a thing by the rich, for the rich. It was also just wrapped up in the entire republican agenda of trying to sabotage the first Black president, because too many white folk couldn’t accept that the president was Black. There was never any possibility of a bipartisan agreement.
Well, I think just very rough numbers Biden added about 7 trillion, which was about the same as Trump 1, driven of course by the pandemic. I think we’re headed for another 6 or 7 trillion under Trump 2, give or take tariffs and whether we can Art of The Deal our way with Xi’s communist empire and enter some new era of AI driven prosperity. So if the total debt is, rough numbers, about 40 trillion, then the past 3 admins account for a substantial fraction 15-20 trillion, tough numbers, given that the economy has been objectively strong since Obama’s second term. We should have decreased to debt in those years of strength, aside from the short few months of the pandemic when vaccines were needed and temporary lockdowns had to be subsidized.
Thanks for the pointer. I have been struggling to get either a oculink or USB4 PCIe tunnel to work with the framework desktop. HOpefully some clues here.
So where do you go, if you don’t care about growth? it feels like a government job (especially in Europe), a academic, or a factory line worker in Southeast Asia might be a better fit then software developer.