matesz

Is this true? If yes it makes a lot of sense. Time and time again, when I try some newly released open weights model I am disappointed. Even some older Claude models are beating them on quality of answers, even though they score less on intelligence in benchmarks.

Nobody says Deno is not better overall than Node. It clearly is, across the board. And nobody cares.

If Deno would provide actual improvements people would care about then for sure it would survive. The problem is that it didn’t. It was just fun project and creators learned a lot for sure. And entire js ecosystem improved thanks to Deno’s push.

I wonder how people at large crypto exchanges handle that. Perhaps shamir share the access to the pkey password and store parts at secure places like a bank? And make official access protocol akin to dnssec, but simplified?

Instead of proving some image on some platform is not AI or severely edited, we can simply prove it was original by verifying unforgeable signature made by a camera / microphone baked into each image produced by it.

And of course in future it could be done for video and audio! This would be absolutely HUGE!

I wholeheartedly recommend you do the same - remove your account and forget about it. Almost certainly you won't miss it, as I didn't miss it. And there is a big chance you will get a big sight of relief, as I did.

If you really must, use https://twitterwebviewer.com/ which imo has better interface than Nitter.

I don't understand this either. IMO, the current SOTA tool for configuration is CUE, because it is the only one that lets you write schemas for arbitrary refinements. I haven't used it myself, but my understanding is that everybody should be writing configurations in something like this instead of YAML, TOML, HCL, or a custom DSL with no tooling. And yes, definitely not in a Turing complete programing language.

Of course! Especially because there is no unified army control.

But this requires giving more context. We can't forget that there are ways, especially ways made by empires, to force other nations to go to war not only as an ally but also to make them less relevant and take a hit also.

One of the main factors which makes this more probable, is what op mentioned, the raise of fascism and combatant militaristic attitudes exacerbated by the fact that their own nation / empire is a falling empire. And EU didn't fell yet, it is huge economy with more people than the US.

The UK is actually the perfect example of this danger. The British Empire didn't dissolve peacefully - it was effectively destroyed by WWI and WWII while trying to suppress a rising Germany.

The subsequent transfer of hegemony to the US was a rare statistical anomaly (a "special case" driven by shared culture and total British exhaustion), but the Empire’s fall itself was catastrophic.

The pattern is violence, not peace. And remember that other aspiring nations to maintain it's position as Empire actively acting to destabilize situation in other states. The reason is simple - it is easiest way to maintain their status.

Brexit for instance was a boon for everybody but UK and EU. There is clear data already about Russian intervention. Recent overt US intervention into ensuring UK remaining separate and EU becoming separate. Think about it.

Unfortunately citizens and therefore ruling elites of empires fueled by relatively extremely high standard of living for decades in comparison to the rest of the World always have very hard time swallowing their national pride. They have built very elaborate conceptual framework of linking their nationality to the level of relative success, fueled by politicians who want to make people feel good again about their nationality.

Just look at the news, almost everything directly or indirectly is linked to the concept "nation".

And in almost all cases of empires a natural consequence of their fall is war. So, it is very important to set expectations right.

It is true, but lets face it - it is just a high-level proposal. Better than previous ones for sure, but still just a proposal.

And there is a massive gap between the PR and the legal reality. Germany and Austria already torpedoed the previous attempt (the SUP) specifically because it allowed online formation without a notary.

So I would advise against certainty in that the fight is over. I also don't want to wait another 10 years. Honestly by that time just setup topco in UK and if series A will come just do the flip later if you don't want to go to SV straight away.

You are right that this threatens the status quo, though. If this works, founders based in Germany will likely abandon the GmbH. That will require swallowing some national pride and admitting that the current system is simply a less efficient, less competitive legal form for high-growth companies.

One thing I think is also worth mentioning are labor rights. I am not arguing against the German model of employee protection. Mitbestimmung could be viewed as a good thing, even if it will mean less power to the VC and / or founders. And frankly, I don't care if the consensus forces strict, German-style Mitbestimmung on the EU-Inc. Stricter form of EU-INC is still vastly better than nothing at all.

Asianometry has a great video on the labor rights in germany btw - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0teMtLT9XI).

The reason this "28th regime" actually works—and bypasses the previous vetos — is that it’s optional. It doesn’t try to force Germany to change its local GmbH laws or kill the notary system overnight. Instead, it creates a parallel, voluntary path. Berlin doesn't have to give up its red tape for local shops, but they have to let a "Unified European Company" exist alongside them.

If we let national pride or local bureaucracy stop this again, we are essentially telling our best founders to leave for the US. Let’s stop protecting red tape and start protecting our future.

I am wondering whether it what are the chances this is going to move forward and when. These are big questions.

Also, is it possible to have all economies unified in the future? No tariffs is one thing, but if we have free trade one not just unified entire legal framework?