i think that doesn't hold true as much in norway and scandinavia in general.

as varjag said: "there's a social consensus about the value people get from this taxation level"

Every AI corp has people reading HN.

i'm very doubtful gmail mails are used to train the model by default, because emails contain private data and as soon as this private data shows up in the model output, gmail is done.

"gmail being read by gemini" does NOT mean "gemini is trained on your private gmail correspondence". it can mean gemini loads your emails into a session context so it can answer questions about your mail, which is quite different.

it's obviously the 3rd of september 1980, but without the 0-padding it looks icky.

I can get better by getting more experienced without getting more intelligent.

Why do you think that accumulating experience and applying it to be better isn’t a mark of intelligence?

True, but one definition of intelligence is the ability to deal with a novel situation. You can't get more experienced if you're "too stupid" to learn and adapt to the challenge.

That's just like, your opinion man. In my opinion neither of those two claims are universially true.

after my father got an old work notebook without windows preinstalled, i suggested trying ubuntu, his first contact with linux. installation went without problems and a few days later i asked him wheter everything was ok. he answered that everything was great, except for that "edgy desktop background of a skull" (he mentioned something about that being a typical linux hacker thing).

it was the "intrepid ibex" version and the "skull" was actually a stylized ibex.

HIV/Aids have made huge progress and so did cancer. Also "cancer" isn't a single disease, they're quite different.

1. what's a layou tit?

2. does it sometimes raise / lower by 2 units?

3. the "flatten" tool is missing.

But there's a real difference how easy it is to write crappy code in a language. In regards to java that'd be, for example, nullability, or mutability. Kotlin, in comparison, makes those explicit and eliminates some pain points. You'd have to go out of your way and make your code actively worse for it to be on the same level as the same java code.

And then there's a reason they're teaching the "functional core, imperative shell" pattern.

On the other hand, Java's tooling for correctly refactoring at scale is pretty impressive: using IntelliJ, it's pretty tractable to unwind quite a few messes using automatic tools in a way that's hard to match in many languages that are often considered better.

I agree with your point, and I want to second C# and JetBrains Rider here. Whatever refactoring you can with Java in JetBrains IntelliJ, you can do the same with C#/Rider. I have worked on multiple code bases in my career that were 100sK lines of Java and/or C#. Having a great IDE experience was simply a miracle.

The language Kotlin is actually developed by JetBrains

I've found that IntelliJ's refactorings don't work as well for Kotlin as Java but, also, I've avoided Kotlin because I don't like it very much.