Maybe actually, with Trump's growing unpopularity, this might lead to a Streisand-esque convincing that it's actually real.

Where I struggle with Mikey is that he really pushes the envelope of what a civilian is supposed to do.

- Filming his commutes - fine

- Reporting when people put him in harm's way - more than fine

- Reporting people he sees who don't endanger him personally but are breaking the rules and could create dangerous situations - probably fine, though getting a little iffy for me

- Going out of his way to look into people's cars and look for phone use - pretty iffy

- Deliberately creating confrontation and direct danger, out of other drivers illegal driving - too far for sure (look up "Gandalf corner")

It is sucky that the police don't do more of this enforcement. But as another London cyclist, he crosses the line that makes me feel less safe as a cyclist, due to the elevated level of hate cyclists receive.

I think absolutely Europe needs it's own mobile OS. And thankfully they can "just" fork Android - or better still, adopt one of the existing forks.

I suspect simply stating that it must be a supported standard will do most of the work, much like standardising phone chargers.

To be honest, sadly, I think you're onto something.

I can imagine the AI agents chatting to each other, figuring out what you like. I can see the chain of thought going "I can't say XYZ is lazy and rough, instead I'll say he saves his energy for what really matters, and lives to the full".

So many apps are just image attractiveness scoring plus some superficial conversation with pleasantries, which are both things AI do well at.

It's also the plot to "Her". People fall in love with AI, but then the AIs start dating each other AIs and dump the humans.

I'll take the EU over US, China, UN or any other bit bureaucracy you can think of. And I'll take the EU over ni EU as well.

that seems to be an unpopular take in Europe right now since you have a clear rise of extremist parties in all its corners.

Theres more of them for sure, but net they are a minority. It's big news when one, in one country, comes close to a majority.

Even the extremely Eurosceptic Orban seems much happier in the EU than out.

In most countries those are the minority, and they seem to be riding a mostly populist wave. The EU isn’t going anywhere any time soon.

EU has a solid path of a lot of money to be spent in the next 5-20 years. Chips, AI, advanced weaponry, more advanced weaponry etc. If there was a program where everyone gets a slice, I'm sure it would work - a bit like ESA. It is doing it piecemeal that runs into the very problem you describe.

It's really cool to see how slow unoptimised C is. You get so used to seeing C easily beat any other language in performance that you assume it's really just intrinsic to the language. The benchmark shows a SQLite3 unoptimised build 12x slower for CCC, 20x for optimised build. That's enormous!

I'm not dissing CCC here, rather I'm impressed with how much speed is squeezed out by GCC out of what is assumed to be already an intrinsically fast language.

The speed of C is still largely intrinsic to the language.

The primatives are directly related to the actual silicon. A function call is actually going to turn into a call instruction (or get inlined). The order of bytes in your struct are how they exist in memory, etc. A pointer being dereferenced is a load/store.

The converse holds as well. Interpreted languages are slow because this association with the hardware isn't the case.

When you have a poopy compiler that does lots of register shuffling then you loose this association.

Specifically the constant spilling with those specific functions functions that were the 1000x slowdown, makes the C code look a lot more like Python code (where every variable is several dereference away).

Right - maybe we're saying the same thing. C is naturally amenable to being blazing fast, but if you compile it without trying to be efficient (not trying to be inefficient, just do the simplest, naive thing) it's still slow - by 1-1.5 order of magnitude.

I mean you can always make things slower. There are lots of non-optimizing or low optimizing compilers that are _MUCH_ faster than this. TCC is probably the most famous example, but hardly the only alternative C compiler with performance somewhere between -O1 and -O2 in GCC. By comparison as I understand it, CCC has performance worse than -O0 which is honestly a bit surprising to me, since -O0 should not be a hard to achieve target. As I understand it, at -O0 C is basically just macro expanding into assembly with a bit of order of operations thrown in. I don't believe it even does register allocation.

It's converging back towards its intrinsic value.

Indeed. And there's risk-reward tradeoff. The debated argument says "have all my data if you want for no reason". The stronger case is, "what do I get in return"?

Often in this discussion it's about a society-wide standard. The benefit to "me" might be that e.g. the police can do their job well, hopefully protecting me from criminals, while sticking to reasonable and trusted privacy controls (e.g. intrusive data collection requires a court warrant, and I trust the courts enough to do a good job). That's very different to uploading all social media conversations logs to NSA because "nothing to hide".

Looping back to this article, it is unclear if there was ever ant good reason to record religion in Amsterdam. Nor would I exclusively blame administrative procedures on the Holocaust - though I'm sure it made matters worse.