Does this actually matter that much? I have a pixel 6a that has the visor style camera bump and with a case on it just disappears.
And even if I'd use the phone without case Google's bar shaped design still allows the phone to lay stable on a surface without wobble, just at a slight angle instead of flat. Which I guess would be an issue with other designs.
Permanently Deleted
That definitely sounds like something we'd do. I think I read somewhere that the difficulty with painting blades is that (especially with dark colors) it leads to them heating up more from sun exposure making differences in thermal expansion a potential issue.
Permanently Deleted
If it's am unsolvable issue particularly with larger birds, then I guess it can't be helped. But to me it seems like this is one of those times where we overemphasize easily countable direct environmental impacts, whereas the diffuse statistical damages of fossil based power plants get ignored.
It might be next to impossible to calculate the impact one individual coal power plant has and how many birds (and other animals) die due to its carbon footprint. But that doesn't mean those aren't happening just because they don't die from flying against the building.
Irgendwie sehe ich das anders. Merz Politik passt sehr gut in die aktuelle Zeit: nicht konstruktiv und andere möglichst schlecht reden, opportunistisch, lügen wie es einem passt und sich null um die Aussagen von gestern kümmern. Das einzige Problem ist eigentlich, dass er damit langfristig nicht seiner eigenen Partei, sondern der AFD hilft. Aber langfristig wird da wohl eh nicht geplant.
Scholz ist schon eher jemand der nicht wirklich in die aktuelle Politik passt, aber der ist glaube ich auch nur Kanzler geworden, weil er der glückliche Dritte war, nachdem die Konkurrenz erst die Grünen und dann sich selbst demontiert hat.
Sie bedauerte, dass es den Grünen nicht gelungen sei, sich durchsetzen, "weil wir jetzt wieder eine Untertunnelung der Schuldenbremse haben statt einer ordentlichen Reform"
Warum haben sie dann zugestimmt anstatt härter zu verhandeln? Bei den Verteilungsausgaben ist es auch bei 1% statt den geforderten 1,5% geblieben, was meiner Meinung nach ein Zeichen ist wie wenig das letztlich doch zählt und der nächsten Regierung mehr Spielraum für Steuergeschenke gibt.
Man hätte sich jetzt auf die militärische Seite beschränken können und dann mit den linken auf eine wirkliche Reform.
On that note they should also finally stop using it. If every politician, institution and public broadcaster would stop using Twitter and start using mastodon it would easily gain enough momentum to replace it as the default platform in Europe.
Sounds like it's going in the right direction for you financially, that's great! Depending on the interest rate paying off a mortage is definitely the right call and a pretty good (+reliable) return.
That said i would probably still set up a small savings plan on a broad market ETF. Not because it's necessarily an amazing time to invest, but to dip your toes into the experience and get a bit desensitized against the fluctuations. Doesn't really matter the amount really (assuming you can invest without large fees), it just makes a difference psychologically to have skin in the game. That way you have some history once you decide to enter the market with larger sums.
The Covid dip, while certainly unusual, is a pretty good example to why it might be a good idea. Since then there's constantly been chaos in the world, but you could have invested with the worst timing in 2020 and would now be better off than by sitting on the sidelines. The past isn't indicative of the future, but on that topic i really like the story of Bob, the world's worst market timer
To be fair i think times are rarely normal. Just since 2000 we've had the dot com bubble, great financial crisis, covid pandemic, ukraine war and now this. Although the current situation feels like a particularly unforced and unnecessary one. And before that there were also plenty of other crisis from world wars, the cold war with things like the cuban missile crisis or the 1973 oil crisis.
HYSA with those rates certainly seem like an appealing place to be in the current market, but as always this is a question about market timing, which is hard to impossible. When did you exit your positions and when do you plan to reenter? Because as said with the recent drops on a wide market scale we are still only down to levels just before the US election and nobody knows how things will play out in the future.
So my point still stands that anyone who is finding himself in acute issues due to the current market changes has done poor risk management. Broad market etfs are meant for a long term investment horizon of 10-15 years exactly so one can weather out downturns. And if someone is close to retirment it would have been prudent to shift some portion of savings into more stable investments similar to how target date funds handle it. Which might still be a good move right now, as the losses are still within reason, assuming a diversified investment strategy (and not something like having bought tesla at peak or the trump meme coin).
That seems like a good addition, although at least for younger people i'd still prefer stocks over the safer annuities, since with a longer time horizon you can weather out some of the fluctuations for higher returns.
What's the better alternative? I'd certainly take a 401k over the current system in Germany where the current working population pays for the pensions of those currently retired. Which is obviously unsustainable if you take a single look at the demographic changes ahead.
Stocks will eventually go up again and at least for my global all world ETF the current drop means we are only back to where we were in September 24. Trump is certainly destroying a lot of wealth with his actions, but I think this would be true regardless of how you invest.
And anyone in hot waters right now because of the current drops should have probably been invested more diversified and maybe reduced risk a bit more.
ETH-Experte Schmidt sagt hingegen, die Zukunft liege in Lithium-Ionen-Batterien. «Der grosse Markt für Lithium-Ionen-Batterien sind Elektro-Fahrzeuge. Gerade in China wird hier viel investiert, und die Batterien werden rasch besser und günstiger. Die Lernkurve dieser Technologie ist enorm», so Schmidt.
Ich bin absoluter Laie und der Mann ist Experte auf dem Gebiet, aber ich dachte der Trend geht eher zu Natrium statt Lithium Batterien? Vor allem dort wo es nicht so auf Gewicht und Energiedichte ankommt.
Das und wenn man es Mal mit jemand anderem tauschen will, dann ist es einfacher, wenn man die Barren einfach ins Regal daneben legen muss, anstatt sie um die halbe Welt zu transportieren.
As i understand it most of the money they are investing goes into new datacenters. So when a model gets outdone by a new one they still have those, unlike e.g. OpenAI that use other companies resources (i think microsoft and oracle mostly?). In a way companies that use those external clouds to train their own models are financing the investments needed for the big players.
AWS, GCP and Azure are all growing 30%+ yoy, are profitable and if anything supply constraint in that they can't build more capacity fast enough to meet demand. So it seems to me that to some degree they are already recouping some of those investments. I don't see a drop in demand for compute, and even if using/training ai would become less resource intensive, Jevons paradox would just lead to more demand.
Of course they also burn a lot of money as anytime a new model gets trained and beats the older ones, it kind of renders the resources spend on the previous one worthless. But to me that seems like the cost of doing business.
The current investments they can afford. What would actually lead to shedding huge amounts of marketcap is, if they'd let a rival establish themselves. Similar to how the movie studios didn't get into streaming early (mostly to not hurt their cable business) and gave Netflix enough time to establish themselves.
To comment on something you mentioned in another reply below:
I just don’t see a world where most people are coughing up more than $10 a month for AI.
I think the big money will be in the business world, where salaries for actual people are high enough that saving a person even a few hours/week or replacing a single employee saves so much money that even expensive subscriptions would easily be worth it.
On the consumer side as you say running smaller models locally will likely be the norm. But that means it would be free for both the likes of Deepseek and Google. And then it'll just come down to who has access to personal information and is better embedded, which would be likely be whoever also controls other aspects of a users life, such as Goole with Android, gmail etc. Money here will be made just as it is done with other free services.
The incumbents will go broke.
Who do you mean with that? Companies like OpenAI or Anthropic, or do you also include the likes of Google/Amazon/Microsoft?
With the former I can see it, but the later also profit from providing the infrastructure (and have other profitable business), so imo those will be just fine.
I am more surprised xAI investors approved. Especially for such a high price.
Twitter actually imo had (and still has) quite a bit of value, but that is only to further Elons ideological goals. As a business it is on a downward trend and was never a cash cow to begin with. Comparatively little room for speculation. It's a stagnating or declining business and doesn't generate large profits if any.
xAI on the other hand is pretty much in the same spot as most other ai companies. It has yet to prove to be a highly profitable business, but there is plenty of room for speculation. So as long as the bubble doesn't burst, it has a high valuation.
Which is all that would matter for any Twitter investor that wants to unload his shares. Although I doubt it would be via ipo, but rather in private funding rounds.
Solar panels and batteries in a shit ton of homes because of energy prices and older government incentives
Yeah, the rise of balcony and roof solar modules here in Germany probably helps us in a similar way.
10000L rain water tanks because government regulations now require rainwater hookups for future toilers and washing machines plus water is expensive here
That on the other hand i don't think is common and especially in cities i don't think that's a thing anywhere. So imo drinking water probably remains the most serious bottleneck, if it were ever compromised.
But don't you still have some staple stuff like noodles, rice, frozen or canned foods and so on in your house? Combined with the fact that you might buy food in larger quantities (e.g. not just 1 apple, but 6 or maybe 1kg), i'd also imagine that most people have enough food for 3 days in their house.
The imo more interesting thing would be fresh water.
14.3.2025
Ich denke es sollte erwähnt werden, dass der Artikel schon 12 Tage alt ist, also noch vor der endgültigen beschließung der Änderungen verfasst wurde.
Ingsgesamt aber finde ich trotzdem ein interessantes und immernoch relevantes Interview.
Dadurch müssen sie nicht mit den Linken verhandeln, und sie haben angenommen, dass die Grünen so erpressbar sind, dass sie ihre Stimmen aus dem alten Bundestag für dieses Manöver hergeben.
Ich bin immernoch der Meinung, dass sich die Grünen zu günstig verkauft haben und das hätten abwarten sollen. Meiner Meinung nach haben sie sich zu günstig verkauft. Aber vielleicht sind die Grünen einfach doch nicht links genug, dass das attraktiv war.
Permanently Deleted
I was under the impression that this was one of their demands at some point, but it didn't make it into the final compromise.
Von den zu berücksichtigenden Einnahmen aus Krediten ist der Betrag abzuziehen, um den die Verteidigungsausgaben, die Ausgaben des Bundes für den Zivil- und Bevölkerungsschutz sowie für die Nachrichtendienste, für den Schutz der informationstechnischen Systeme und für die Hilfe für völkerrechtswidrig angegriffene Staaten 1 vom Hundert im Verhältnis zum nominalen Bruttoinlandsprodukt übersteigen [emphasis mine]
Source (german), pdf warning. This is the official text.
Additionally it's not even purely defense spending that they can exclude, but also some related costs. Making even more space in the regular budget for unrelated expenses.
Sadly I think Airbus is already busy as is. As far as I understand it, they were already supply constrainted before this and have their order books filled for years. Otherwise Boeing's most recent quality and safety issues would have had a larger effect.
I don't know if they could increase capacities even if they wanted to, or if a volatile situation like this would allow for the investments that would be necessary to do so.
Imo this just accelerates China's own ambitions to build up their own rival with Comac. This development makes the transition less gradual and they'll have to eat some losses, but that's something their system is capable of.
On the other hand it's actually worse for the US, because they'll miss out on those sales and might not be able to sell them somewhere else. With Boeing already struggling and this being a key industry, this will mean that it might require more subsidies in the future to keep them going or succeed in the turnaround.