klunger

Yes, it is not clear why they have chosen CO2 beyond PR. There are other gas mixtures that would likely have better yields.

At first, I thought this was an elaborate joke because fossil fuels are effectively "CO2 batteries."

Instead, it's compressed gas. Which is fine and possibly the best solution in certain contexts. But, it isn't exactly revolutionary or necessarily preferable to Li-ion most of the time.

Well, with this ERC fund, we are trying to attract high quality research scientists. While there are many of these who also have entrepreneurial ambitions, it is a venn diagram, not a circle.

However, your critique of the wealth tax on unrealized gains is a big problem more generally. I have some interaction with the startup ecosystem these days here. Anecdotally, I have seen several founders choose to incorporate elsewhere in Europe or the US because of it. Unfortunately, it's incredibly hard to quantify how many do not stay here because of it.

This aspect of the tax has had significant opposition for years, but nothing ever seems to come from it.

Opposition to tax on realized gains/assets is less vocal. Someone else here characterized that part as similar to property taxes in the US and I think that is fairly accurate.

Details on what is taxed how much, if you are interesed: https://www.skatteetaten.no/en/person/taxes/get-the-taxes-ri...

ETA: we are looking for evolutionary biologists. Not many entrepreneurial personalities here, more like a lot of bird watchers (I say this lovingly). Over in the groups with translation potential is a different story of course.

It 500 mil to lure US researchers. They say "from every country" because they have to, but we know why it was made and who will get most of it.

No, it is a new fund that is only for scientists coming from outside Europe. https://erc.europa.eu/news-events/news/choose-europe-science...

This reads like a bitter ex-employee. I guess you were in Germany?

There are plenty of European countries that do use English as the working language for technical fields, if there is not enough domestic talent.

What you say about the US research ecosystem may have been true until January 2025 but it is unfortuantely no longer the case. At the same time, the EU is finally getting its act together in both defense AND research funding. So I would forecast a sunnier future in Europe for scientists than the the US, at least for the next generation.

My department (at a Norwegian university) is working on a headhunting plan. The way the ERC grants are structured, the applicant needs a sponsoring institute. So, we are identifying researchers who are working on relevant topics, if we think it will be a good fit (and/or if we have successfully collaborated with them in the past).

Some of the details are still being ironed out. The beauracracy is real! Even so, I guess the first emails will go out late next week.

Ok. Thank you for the explanation :)

I assume the other one made it through the organized flagging campaign because you intervened. So, thanks for that too.

I am glad the article finally made it through who/whatever is trying to keep it down.

But, c'mon Dan. I posted this 23 hours ago. That post is 2 hours old. How did it get flagged as a dupe? I searched before posting and could not find it anywhere.

Relatedly: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42990030

I am generally very happy with the work dang does to keep this a community I enjoy.

It is more the lack of intervention on what is obviously a concerted effort to suppress discussion (specifically of involvement with the Com) that I find disturbing.

Last one took about an hour. I have an actual stopwatch running now.

> xAI will continue on this steep trajectory of progress over the coming months, with multiple exciting technology updates and products soon to be announced.

There is a lot of potential for using AI in drug discovery and development, biotech more broadly and chemistry/material science. Pharma is investing heavily in this right now. If useful, the output here could potentially also support Neuralink and even SpaceX.

Coupled with the line about the "true nature of the universe", I guessed this was really about entering that space.

But when you look at the careers page [https://x.ai/careers#open-roles], they are only hiring AI engineers. No biochemists or MDs, material scientists or any other natural science domains. So, if natural science discovery is actually on the road map, either: - it is in the long term future - they have no idea what they are doing

More likely, they are not going for natural science and this is basically just a play to compete with openAI. And, in that case, I don't understand how they convinced investors to put 6 billion dollars into it.

In 2013, I had an internship at a kind of industrial incubator and fund in Kongsberg, Norway[https://kongsberginnovasjon.no/?lang=en]. Although that was 11 years ago now, and a lot has certainly changed in the industry, physics has not.

At the time, they had an explicit focus on alternative energy technologies, so recieved a lot of proposals similar to this. I do not remember the details of my analyses anymore, but I do remember that every single one of them was rejected because none of them passed a basic back-of-the-envelope plausibility evaluation.

These projects basically fail because their output is poor compared to other solutions of similar or even lower cost.

It is also important to consider how much energy it takes to manufacture their solution in the first place. How long does it take for them to actually become net carbon negative? Does it even happen in the lifetime of the product? Sometimes the answer is no (in which case, what is even the point?)

Yes, this.

I am about a month away from finishing my teaching degree (math). My experience so far AND the best research is extremely clear on the following:

Kids learn best by working in small groups with other kids.

These groups need to be gently guided by adults, but they should mostly be left to do a lot of independent exploration and discussion amongst themselves. The teacher is there to prod discussion in productive directions, provide feedback, answer questions, give hints and encouragement where needed. Admittedly, AI could do certain part of the teachers job, but it can never replace a peer group.

Exactly. If you are going to use this, I believe you should also become a patron* of the podcasts you do it to. And, in that case, you often have access to an ad-free version anyway.

*or "tip" or whatever other monetization channel they have. Very few rely solely on ads.

The headline belies the scope of this task. If you click in to see what these are: - one is a full course in convolutional neural networks https://cs231n.github.io/ - one is a 500 page text book https://www.lirmm.fr/~ashen/kolmbook-eng-scan.pdf - another one is an 80 page text book (?) https://arxiv.org/pdf/math/0406077

and so on.

I would guess it is possible to go through this list if you make it your full time job for a year or so. That might be worth it depending on your priorities. Regardless, it bears mentioning.

We bought a two-unit house together with another couple, with the same idea in mind. They have a kid the same age as our youngest (18 months) and also do not have any family nearby to help with childcare.

It took over a year of planning and searching to find a place that we could all agree on. It was also hard to find a bank to give a loan to 4 adults because it is so unconventional.

In my mind, I call it "our modern village". So far, we have only had a couple of group dinners, because we are all so busy with renovations, jobs and kids etc. Modern adult life. So, those are dinners that would not have happened otherwise. Its also great to share chores like organizing the storage shed, mowing the lawn etc.

I am really pleased with our decision so far, although I am really looking forward to these renovations being done.

I am glad you wrote it, please don't be sorry. A lot of us feel the same way.

Here's what I imagine sama and AI apologists would say in response so they can sleep at night:

Have you thought about training Priya to use ChatGPT? You don't need to know how to code well to be skilled at using it, especially if she has the domain knowledge.

Then you will have 10x'd your company's output and Priya keeps her job. At least for a time -- that is, until others start doing it too -- this will be a big competitive advantage. Then you will definitely need her and her colleagues!

/end

But, there are many reasons why laying her off and just using GPT4 is the better business decision, at least short term. The above is a totally naive suggestion stemming from reasoning motivated by the incomprehensibly large profits going to OpenAI and their eventual competitors.

Actually, I think we are about to see massive unemployment (tens of millions if not hundreds globally), even greater inequality and attendant social unrest. Even if smooth transitions can be made for some of the jobs made redundant by ChatGPT, this will be the exception not the rule. Something will have to give. UBI? Regulations? Physical destruction of data centers by angry, hungry, desperate people?

Probably all of the above. It's going to be a chaotic time until the world finds a new equilibrium.

On a personal note: at the ripe age of 40, in direct response to GPT4, I've decided to go back to school this fall to become a certified teacher. The poor work conditions and low pay kept me away from it as a full time job until now. However, I believe this is one of the few jobs that will still be around in 25 years when I (hopefully) retire. I'll take low pay and poor work conditions over the desperation of extended unemployment and poverty.

(I like kids and have taught voluntarily in various capacities over the years, so it's not as crazy as it maybe sounds.)

Just fyi, your website currently states you are looking for React, React Native and TypeScript people for frontend.

Flutter is a completely different kettle of fish.

The same story could have been written about Oslo - my home - and the other major cities in Norway (Bergen, Stavanger, even Kristiansand).

It's not so bad in the country side, but there are very few jobs there. I have some friends (a couple with 1 kid) who moved to distant suburbs of Oslo for more affordable housing. But the long commutes destroyed their quality of life and put a strain on their marriage. They are now moving back to a tiny, very expensive rental in Oslo. Its a definitive step down from when they left.

We have outgrown our apartment -- the kids are getting bigger. So, we really need a 4 bedroom place (ideally 5 so we could have an office, but we'd settle for 4 and a desk in the living room). There are no apartments - which would be a lot more affordable than a house - that large here. The max bedroom count in apartments here that I have ever seen is 3, which we already have.

So we are planning to buy a 2-unit house ("tomannsbolig") with another couple with kids. It's the only way we can afford something with enough bedrooms, without a large inheritance or something like that. None of us have anything like that coming. We have 4 "good," stable jobs (programmers, researchers etc). Even with other couple in the mix, it feels impossible to find something in the same school district. We've been looking for over a year.

So, we are thinking about looking for a third friend or couple, since there are a few houses that have 3 units. It's just tricky to find someone you feel comfortable enough with to ask that. But we hope that 5-6 incomes will be enough in this market.

*Before anyone tells me my kids can keep sharing bedrooms, try telling that to them! The increasing need for privacy and lack of space is becoming a real problem here.

The source is a summary of the position of the 9 major political parties on further oil exploration. There are dozens of parties here, yes, but the 9 listed there account for about 92% of the population. They are all the ones that have representation in parliament at the moment.

The views of the parties express anywhere from complete support to complete opposition to further drilling, with some compromise positions as well. If you compare that with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_political_parties_in_N... how much each party has representation in parliament at the moment, you will see that a large swath of the population is opposed to it.

However, because of the way that the parliament system works here, this issue is not correctly represented in current policy.

We got click-baited by an interesting headline, friends.

Instead of trying to tackle all the problems with this piece, I will just address the most glaring ones:

1) Norway is a nation, not a company. It does not have maximization of shareholder value as it's primary driving force. Yes, there is the sovereign wealth fund. But, that is about managing the assets that have been collected. It has nothing to say about where the assets come from.

The author conflates these things, when they are completely separate. In fact, the wealth fund is in the process of divesting itself from fossil-fuel related entities. [1]

2) Speaking of Norway being a country -- it has 5 million people and dozens of political parties. Most of those people and political parties do not actually support further north sea exploration [2]. Much like in the US and most other countries I suppose, the actions of the government do not represent the will of the majority of the people.

3) Given that Norway is well aware of the climate crisis, they have spent considerable effort trying to make their economy less dependent on oil. Since 2008 or so, the share of oil as a percentage of total exports has been on the decline [3]. This has been the result of a conscious effort and set of policies to diversify the economy. Norway wants to stop being dependent on oil because they know it is shitty for the climate and it is an economically precarious position to be in.

And yet, this piece suggests Norway should just drop oil all at once and further suggests that it has not made any effort at all to do so in the past. In fact, a lot of money and political will is being exerted into this very endeavor [4]

[1] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-norway-swf-oil-idUSKBN1WG...

[2] https://naturvernforbundet.no/lofoten-vesteralen-og-senja/hv...

[3] https://www.statista.com/statistics/1025405/share-of-crude-o...

[4] https://www.bbc.com/news/business-35318236

Reading this made me think, 'Wouldn't it be nice if there was an app that just called out people for doing generous/friendly/artistic/impressive things locally?'

There must be something else going on that you are not aware of hogging the CPU. This cannot possibly be the source of that.

It seems to me like companies have gotten away with virtue signaling without performing any meaningful change for a long time. So, the fact that this article (and others like it) is getting so much attention now feels like a sea change. Or maybe it's just me that is paying more attention, but I don't think so.

This new level of accountability makes me hopeful that we can look forward to more meaningful, impactful changes on a systemic level.

I don't think the author is suggesting that business Chinese businessmen are uniquely successful. He is really just trying to pinpoint what makes the successful ones successful.

You could remove the word "Chinese" from the whole thing, and it would still make sense.