If the USA cared about the Venezuelan people they'd lift the sanctions. The USA cares about toppling a regime that knows its sitting on an oil gold-mine and wont let American companies freely run away with it.
You'd think people would give up on claiming we're trying to take other countries' oil when we didn't take any of Iraq's and instead became an oil exporter ourselves.
Unrelated, but I don't get the "taco" thing. I'm Mexican— it's a head-scratcher that people use the name of our food as an insult to Trump. He doesn't look like a taco, and the acronym is a sentence, not an adjective/phrase, so it doesn't make much sense spelled out in most contexts.
RINO republicans don't look like rhinoceros. That the word makes no sense by itself means that you'd have to ask what they meant by it. If the acronym were "DUMB" or "CLOWN" or whatever then I don't think it'd stand out as much.
Also, you're right that it's often used in a way that wouldn't make sense grammatically if it were written out, but that's true for most acronyms I think; e.g. JPEG or GIF.
"Look at this funny Graphics Interchange Format I just sent you!"
taco is an acronym that stands for the phrase trump always chickens out, it was coined or popularized earlier this year when Trump backed off of The Liberation Day tariff stuff when the bond market got nervous.
The pendulum swung really hard back to in-person office work a couple years ago. I wonder if this will swing it back and make more positions remote-friendly.
This only incentivizes opening a GCC in Eastern Europe or India. I can't justify hiring a remote worker in the US and paying them $150k-200k when I can hire 2-3 people in Warsaw, Prague, Tel Aviv, or Hyderabad for $60k-90k.
I initially loved remote work and was doing 2/5ths of my week remove before 2020. Once I became fully remote for years, the horror sunk in--it's career suicide.
IMO it’s just different. If you want to go into management or anything involving politics, I do think remote isn’t the move.
As a fully remote engineering contractor I’ve been building my area of expertise, clients and connections, and so far it’s been alright. It does take work and there’s no one to guide you, but in my experience with ambition it’s doable.
I mean, depends on how you describe it. One could easily say:
Phone method:
* Find phone
* Search for the right app, before finding the right recipe
* Leave my phone on counter, constantly having to move it as I move plates, pans etc.
* Wash and dry hands after each step, before unlocking phone
* Clean it every time gunk gets to it
Meta glasses:
* They're already on, just ask for recipe
* No need to ever wash/dry hands, move a device around, or clean it since one can easily unlock it without touching it
Right? Similarly with cookbooks, the best case is great and the worst case is terrible. There's a reason there's a market for recipe websites, cookbooks, etc.
> Why do we need type checking at all? The standard answer is scale.
It's not scale, it's correctness.
> Consider this: electronics engineers routinely design systems with millions of components, intricate timing relationships, and complex interactions between subsystems. Yet they don’t rely on anything analogous to our type checkers.
They do. Verilog gets its name from "verification". The electronics industry has built all sorts of verification and testing software and equipment to essentially do the same things as type-checkers; ensure that inputs yield the right outputs, and some sort of assurance this is true all the time.
> We’ve created systems so intricate and interconnected that human reasoning fails, then declared the tools that help us navigate this complexity to be essential.
That's just how complexity works. We've created cities so large we need maps to navigate them. We've created so much medical knowledge, we need specialists. This last one is a good analogy— our bodies are so complex we still don't fully understand them. That doesn't mean there's anything wrong with them.
> It’s like building a maze so convoluted that you need a GPS to walk through it, then concluding that GPSs are fundamental to architecture.
As similar as this sounds to the statement I made about cities above, this sentence is flawed in that GPSs in no way fundamental to architecture. They're fundamental to quick navigation. You can live without a GPS, but you'll take more wrong turns if you're not familiar with a place.
CAD is fundamental to architecture, and helps both build cheaper and avoid mistakes.
> The missing piece is programming languages and development environments designed from the ground up for this isolated, message-passing world. Languages where time is a first-class concept, where components are naturally isolated, and where simple data formats enable universal composition. Tools that make it as easy to wire together distributed components as it is to pipe together UNIX commands.
This is a bad conclusion because anyone who was worked with microservices and distributed systems will know– they don't reduce complexity, they just try hide it.
We'd like to believe we can create a big system out of little system— and that is true. That's how programming languages work, and the reason functions, modules, classes, etc exist. Logic can be encapsulated.
We'd also like to believe we can completely decouple these systems, so that when my team works in the "users" service, I can just ship code and not have to worry about any of the other teams' work. This is not true. If my system changes its output, it'll have downstream effects— wether it be in the same, type-checked program or a separate program consuming it. The only difference is in the former case I realize my change will break something and I am told to mind the change as I write the code for it— In the latter, I don't. Independently deployable components come in two flavours— non-typechecked and error prone due to version drift and unintended API changes, or typechecked, which is essentially a mono-system but with extra steps.
> If I were to optimize for "happiness" I would just cash out, abandon my family, move to Vietnam, play video games and eat Hot Pockets all day.
That sounds like hedonism, not happiness.
> But the life I choose is hard because doing hard things is good and fulfilling.
Fulfillment is a big component of happiness. Aristotle famously contrasted hedonism (seeking pleasure) and eudaimonia (meaning and fulfillment) in Ethics iirc and mostly agreed with you— happiness is found eudamonia, not hedonism.
I'll also mention, hedonism is most often associated with money, because pleasures can be bought, but eudaimonia is only achieved through meaning, wisdom, action, etc.
I see the point being made here, and yeah 5%-20% extra for what amounts to insurance against geopolitics isn't too bad, but doesn't this all fall apart when China catches up?
That 5%-20% is worth it now because no one else can fabricate competing chips. In a competitive market, 5%-20% can be the difference between having the price edge or not. I understand why the USA wants TSMC to manufacture outside of Taiwan, but perhaps it makes sense to move it not the USA but, say, Mexico?
Chinese car companies seem to be slowly but surely rolling American car companies in international markets with great value at low prices. The move in this market evidently isn't to move manufacturing away from Mexico at a 5%-20% increase in price.
In the chip market there's less immediate competition, but I can only imagine it'll come. Hopefully economies of scale would have removed this extra 5%-20% by the time China catches up?
> I see the point being made here, and yeah 5%-20% extra for what amounts to insurance against geopolitics isn't too bad
Well that is an insurance only for the US. As a european, I feel safer, or at best neutral, knowing my ships are made in the Taiwan rather than the US, so having them more 5-20% more expensive is not competitive.
With all their antagonizing of allies, and predatory privacy laws, and repeated espionage on allies, the US has disintegrated any trust other parties have to buy things made there.
As a European I would like geographically and politically dispersed production lines for one of the most important products of the 21 century. Domestic production would be idal, but whatever we can get is a plus.
Because Taiwan is a small, earthquake prone island perpetually on the brink of invasion of a superpower 180 kilometers away. And antagonizing, predatory privacy laws and espionage is also an issue with CCP, however we still import a lot of electronics and semiconductors from there.
What are you going to do when China invades Taiwan, though?
If rumors are to be believed, TSMC will scuttle their fabs before they fall into Chinese hands. Even if they don't, or fail to execute, Taiwan-based chip production will be disrupted for years.
Bet you'll be happy that TSMC has fabs in the US, despite your understandable misgivings.
Credit where credit is due: Australia, UK, New Zealand and Canada are all doing their major parts in espionage on each other and everyone else as a service as part of Five Eyes.
As a European myself, I am pretty miffed that my fellow Europeans keep acting like we're not leading the charge when it comes to spying on each other.
With China, the issue isn't really the quality of the product. It's the geopolitical issues.
Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and other countries even Philippines and Vietnam don't want to depend too much on China. A lot of island disputes and so on and so forth.
My guess right now is that China will never catch up because Europe, US, Australia, and many other developing countries will avoid depending on China critically. This doesn't mean 0% would buy from China but it'll never become a critical dependency.
It's a real shame that the U.S is alienating it's allies through aggressive economic policy. Maybe we'll find ourselves on the wrong side of that economically resilient policy.
> My guess right now is that China will never catch up because [..]
The problem China is big enough to catch up just by it depending on itself + some cheap mass consumer market outlets to even further scale production.
Like they have 1408 Million people ~3times the US and their education system tries (at least of paper) to give everyone a chance to reach silence excellence iff (and only iff) they are noticeable above average (but also due to the form of their education system for people which certain kinds of approaches to thinking which is a major handicap they gave themself accidentally). Like either way with that population size, priority on catching up on chip production, willingness to steal science (through it's not like the US doesn't have a habit for that, too) it's just a matter of time until they have some truly genius people put into the right kind of position with the right kind of resources which will close the gap step by step.
Oh they will catch up as TSMC amd Samsung are running out of steam and Intel is imploding. There's nothing better than motivating China to take on this monumental effort than thd tariffs and export controls.
If I understand the comment above correctly, one can carry an I94 too and those you can just print on the website [1]
I'm guessing there's no size requirements? If so it might be a good idea to just print four on an A4, and have one folded in your wallet, one tucked in your bag-pack, one in the car, etc.
