Very sad day for the EU during an already very sad period.
First, this vote by the commission is a mockery of the EU own rule. The commission is not competent for comprehensive deal mixing trade and cooperation and splitting the deal like they have done at behest of Germany is a disgrace and likely illegal. I hope and fully expect the ECJ to strike this down.
Second the content of the deal is completely outdated. No mirror close while the EU tightened their own rules so much is insane. The alleged safe guards are completely insuffisant. We are basically saying it's ok for a foreign sellers to do things we ban here. It's even more insane when you consider that it's Bayer actually selling the banned pesticides and they are amongst the companies benefiting the most from the deal.
Third the market we are supposedly opening to Europe have already moved on. European automakers already have factories in the Mercosur so exports won't move. The only things which will change is how expensive it is to ship parts so the deal is basically lining up the margins of auto companies with no local job increase. That leaves pharmaceutical and industrial machineries but even there Europe is quickly losing ground to China and India. The commission knows that and pivoted into pretending the deal is actually about securing source of raw materials like lithium from Argentina but ironically the main consumers of this lithium in Europe will be Chinese companies factories in Hungary. We are destroying the livelihood of our farmers, a fully local part of the economy, to help China.
Fourth the deal affects various countries in a massively unequal way with clear losers and counties which incorrectly think they win. I can't stop noticing that it's always the same country blocking common investments, blocking transfers, using the common currency and internal devaluation to prop up its exports at the expense of its neighbors, killing common procurement to try to favour its own industrial base, currently trying to destroy our space industry so moneys go to its startup. So much for the supposed solidarity I guess. There is very little union in the so called European Union.
That's simply wrong. The minimum limit for products ban in the EU but actually sold to Mercosur countries by Bayer is above zero. That's the heart of the French disagreement. The deal doesn't contain mirror close. We are allowing the Mercosur country to sell us products that would be banned in the EU.
Considering the impact on prices, cashback is basically reverse redistribution. It makes the situation worse for the poorest customers to give money to the banks and their richest customers.
Yep if you use a card in the US the company just takes 2c from your left pocket and puts it in your right pocket in a form that's more difficult to use.
And if you don't use a card, the business takes 2c from your left pocket and keeps it.
It's a great trick though, people really buy into the whole points/cashback thing and don't realise they're being paid with their own money
It's usually more than 3 cents out of your left pocket and 1.5-2 into your right one, even if you do everything right and never incur interest charges or fees.
> It's a great trick though, people really buy into the whole points/cashback thing and don't realise they're being paid with their own money
Even better, they become poorly-paid lobbyists for the entire scheme, since it successfully makes them feel like they're getting "luxury" items/services for free by "gaming the banks", when they're really just participating in a loyalty scheme exactly as designed.
Sure, it's possible to eke out a net cash profit here and there, but all in all, it's just a great counterexample to homo economicus.
It’s not being paid with my own money. If I can get 2% cash back, then the situation is I either pay 98% of $x, or $x.
Nowadays though, many sellers are offering at least 3% or higher discounts for not using credit card. My mobile network provider, home ISP, daycare and kids activities, insurance, taxes, healthcare, tradespeople, and even Target offers a 5% discount if you do not use a credit card.
It’s basically only travel, restaurants, and non Target retail that earns credit card rewards. Although sign up bonuses make it worth paying the additional credit card fees sometimes.
> It’s not being paid with my own money. If I can get 2% cash back, then the situation is I either pay 98% of $x, or $x.
The counterfactual isn't getting or not getting 2% cash back, it's the merchant paying or not paying ~3% in fees, a part of which you get back from your issuing bank as a kickback to keep participating in and advocating for this scheme.
Of course this would require regulatory action. Absent that, the status quo represents the stable equilibrium.
Well if you can get $100 worth of X on credit card for $98, but you can buy the same thing with cash for $97, aren't you actually paying 150% of the "cash back" with your own money? ¯\\_(ಠ_ಠ)_/¯
Even as somebody really disliking the current interchange fees in the US, 4% is a money grab on the merchant's side that I find hard to empathize with.
Even if the merchant pays the sticker price for card acceptance, it's usually just below 3%, unless international cards are involved. Add to that the fact that cash transactions in restaurants are often accounted for in "more tax efficient ways", and it feels even more icky.
My point is if credit cards didn't exist, the $1 thing would cost 98c, so in that sense it's your money.
Admittedly that is overstating it a bit because not everyone uses a rewards card. In reality the 2% cashback is 1% your own money being given back to you and 1% money from people paying in cash being transferred to you (normally regressively as someone else pointed out).
If you get a discount for paying cash, then it really is just your own money
They are all over the place, especially small businesses. A cash only (paper money) price is typically less than debit card or other electronic “cash” discounts because tax evasion is assumed.
Next time you have an independent contractor do some work, after they give a price, ask them if they will accept 90% or even less if you pay cash.
My barber has a sign with a cash price, a Zelle/Venmo price, and a credit card price.
Like I said, I don't think I've ever seen them. For instance, you can't go into a Walmart or Best Buy and ask for a cash discount. Maybe a small business offers them, but I live in a small town (pop < 4k) and our grocery store and hardware store don't offer a cash discount. Neither do our gas stations offer a discount for paying for gas with cash, as the other reply mentions.
I'm not disputing they exist, just that it's exceedingly rare and not the norm.
> My barber has a sign with a cash price, a Zelle/Venmo price, and a credit card price.
I'm half joking and half serious, is he intentionally trying to confuse customers? Why do Zelle/Venmo have their own prices, and what price do I pay if I just want to pay with the debit card on my phone?
From someone who lives in bay area (so not <4k), this is exceedingly common. Of course Walmart does not have a small business owner on-site who can oversee such adjustments, but think mom and pop / single owner stores. They do it all the time.
Think contractors. They also do it all the time. When I did a remodel a couple of years back, he asked for cash. It was a small amount so I did not think much until my accountant told me I will need receipts if I wanted them added to my house's capital /cost. I asked the contractor and he stalled me for weeks while also saying I will need to pay more for receipts, until one day I forgot chasing (and am thinking of it now) and just let it go I guess.
>I'm half joking and half serious, is he intentionally trying to confuse customers?
He is sharing some of the savings from tax evasion with the customer.
I do not know if he can accept electronic payments from a debit card on the phone. I presume Zelle/Venmo is simpler than figuring out a system to separate debit cards and credit cards.
>just that it's exceedingly rare
Discounts for non credit card payment methods (such as ACH/debit card/Zelle/Venmo/paper cash) seem more and more common to me. Bigger businesses likely won't engage in tax evasion allowing for bigger discounts for paper cash, but fewer and fewer of my expenses are worth paying with a credit card.
I'm seeing it more often. They don't say cash discount, they say they're charging a fee for using a credit card.
What annoys me is debit card fees are supposed to be capped in the U.S. But for unclear reasons many payment processors don't honor this, even large processors like PayPal and Square. Merchants tell me the debit card fee is same as a credit card.
My local government charges a 2.9% fee for use of credit or debit card as well.
A casual look at where people live the oldest, what they eat, and what's recommended tell you all you need to know about food recommendations then and now.
It's a field where actual long term controlled experiments are impossible, confounding variables are everywhere, and multiple lobbies have vested interests in the outcomes.
I take everything with a grain of salt apart from studies of harm when sources are credible and numerous and even then, I'm not fully confident.
The only current advice I follow is avoiding industrially processed food. That sounds like a sound one as this kind of food is basically terra incognita. It's just applying the precaution principle.
I think avoiding industrially processed food is wise, but it eliminates 99% of restaurant food and 90% of prepared food in almost any setting, only exception being about half the stuff at a salad bar.
Almost everything that isn't a single ingredient whole plant or animal food contains industrially processed oil or sweetener/starch.
Still worth doing imho but I understand why it's not easy for most people.
It doesn't have to be a religion. I don't care when I eat out. The point is not to be absolutely consistant. It's just the guideline I use regarding what I eat.
I don't really eat prepared food. I mostly buy whole food to be used as ingredients. Cooking simple meals is not particularly hard. I think most people overestimate the complexity and time requirement involved.
> The only current advice I follow is avoiding industrially processed food.
It is also surprisingly hard in practice. There are so many foods that on the label are supposed to be whole foods or low processed but then when you read the ingredients do you realize you've been bamboozeld.
For me avoiding processed foods is not that hard, I only eat whole foods like vegetables and fruits (where I live there are no labels on these whole foods). I know that this is not doable for most of you, but it can be done if you want.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plant-based_diet
This is a complete myth. Human populations are not homogenous, gene pools that relied on agriculture for the last 10k years are completely different than hunter gatherer populations. You have been lied to
Which myth? I have genuine trouble understanding what you disagree with.
Industrially processed food is a very recent invention. I'm not talking about modern fad like the Nova classification here. I don't care about bread as long as it's made with water, yeast and flour. I just don't want my food to contain any recent additives.
My take is basically that if it was fine a thousand years ago, it's probably ok-ish minus everything we know now to be poisonous. The blind spot is obviously plant selection and modern varieties being different but well, that's ok, nothing is perfect.
On the one hand, you have the CEO apparently all in on Gemini and subscriptions which should push for some kind of Office 365 "we don't care where you use it as long as you subscribe" and strong gestures towards their hardware partners.
On the other hand, you have Osterloh who won the tug of war and is now trying to turn the hardware division and Android into some kind of Apple vertically integrated machine like if he was still at Motorola while their SoC is lagging behind one to two generations and they don't seem to have the volume to sustain this kind of investment. Plus, they have regulatory pressure on the competition side from both the USA and the EU.
Google strategy is still as unreadable as ever. It's frankly a miracle this company is still standing. They are living testimony to the power of having a monopoly on a large market.
Interestingly I now view the Motorola acquisition as a massive mistake, not because of the assets, but because the culture it brought in is actively damaging to the overall company. It's so weird trying to emulate Apple exactly when the regulatory environment is focused on tearing down this model.
Honestly, Apple is getting gifts and gifts from all sides (though with the huge blunder that has been *OS 26), Google doesn't know how to make ecosystems and has never known to do so. Android is great as a single device, but the whole integration, even with their own devices is horrible (Near Share, setting their 'Find My' ecosystem as opt-in instead of opt-out...).
It's another example of EEE (Embrace, Extend, Extinguish), as they finally succeeded with Chrome. And there is likely quite a lot of political interference.
And no, it has nothing to do with the lack of vertical integration. Microsoft, despite all the millions of issues with the platform, has succeeded in making an ecosystem on the enterprise side despite having very little to say in the PC hardware.
The main difference is that you don't know how many code points you have in the prefix as they use variable encoding so it can be up to four but as little as one. I imagine the choice of four bytes for the prefix was actually done specifically for this reason. That's the maximum length of a UTF-8 code point.
The length is not the number of characters anymore but just the size of the string.
We chose 4B because that was the maximum number of bytes that would be unused otherwise (4B for the length, 8B for the pointer leaves 4B), the UTF8 encoding doesn't really matter.
Also, for UTF8 specifically, cutting code points in half is fine as long as all strings are valid UTF8. The UTF8 encoding is prefix free, i.e., no valid code point is a prefix of another valid code point, so for prefix matching we can usually just compare bytes.
It only gets more complicated if you add collations or want to match case-insensitively. But at that point you need to take into account all edge cases of the Unicode spec anyway.
> We chose 4B because that was the maximum number of bytes that would be unused otherwise
I'm sure you did but there is something funny reading this phrase while at the same time considering you have robbed two bits from your pointer to represent class - admittedly the only thing I find questionable in your design.
If that's the case it's a happy accident because having a full code point here is quite nice.
That's a good point. We just use pointer tagging in many different places (e.g. for pointer swizzling in our buffer pages), so including a few bits of information in a pointer just seemed obvious.
The subsides were during Clinton and Bush 2. BMW and Mercedes were here long before Biden and Obama. It makes good sense to manufacture your product in the area it is sold - that's the real reason for their mfg base establishment.
Not only the direct jobs, but also the other support ones - automation, suppliers, maintenance, facilities work, etc.
Absolutely, especially with larger/heavier items like cars... I'm frankly somewhat surprised there aren't more assembly plants across the US just to reduce the shipping costs of the final product. Even with a more globalized supply chain of the component parts.
I'm talking of the Biden-era IRA here. BMW had to invest 1.7 billions in 2022 to manufacture most of its EV directly from there as you can compete in the US market without the IRA subsidies and the conditions severely limit even which parts you can import.
That's a significant shift moving from final assembly to forcing most of the supply chain to be relocated.
What countries, beyond the US, are you speaking to? I mean, I'm interested in what countries you're talking about that don't leverage tariffs and other restrictions to favor domestic industries in those countries.
There is EU / Schengen which immensely boosted local economies. We had TTIP but unfortunately it was killed by opposing forces, and there is still MERCOSUR. However, Germany with it's brilliantly corrupt leadership, changed that strategy to "trade facilitates change" ("wandel durch handel") and went all in to removing trade barriers w/ russia and china because the idea was to convince them if we trade they won't try to kill us. Obviously this approach failed.
Strategically, it does not make sense for democratic countries to have higher trade barriers with each other than with autocrat states. But over time the hybrid warfare by autocrat states leveraged social media to convice people to vote against their own interest e.g. brexit.
Tax revenue. The nation is tens of trillions in debt with a multi-trillion per year deficit. Tariffs are proportional to spending, and encourage domestic production and security.
There have been several favorable trade deals as well as several announcements for new production facilities in the US... this may cost more than imports, but there's something to be said for domestic security in terms of access, especially in the likes of a global pandemic or war.
I'm not suggesting it's a perfect solution, or situation, only in that it isn't exactly an idea completely without merit and just blindly applied at random.
You're description matches a well planned and communicated slow increase of tariffs targeting specific products or industries so companies have time to adjust (newsflash, US was already doing this). Trump used blanket tariffs as a hammer to extort other countries, but its not like we want to buy your shitty cars anyway. Most of these facilities already existed or were planned. hint: most foreign brands were building their cars in US already.
If the economy is doing so well because of these tariffs why are they hiding numbers?
Its not even the first time US tried tariffs like these, it didn't go well then but Trump talks about like it was a golden age.
I think that humanity hasn't changed as much as maybe you give it credit for as a whole and that most human behaviors are somewhat consistent. I do think that taxes on actions as part of trade is better than taxes on income. I also think that taxes that are somewhat protectionist are better than "free trade" against nations that don't have similar quality of life, laws regarding labor, or free trade themselves.
The portions regarding trade are borne out by the VAT systems in place throughout EU and UK. The fact that tariffs exist in pretty much every nation of the world bears out their utility. The reason that most people are even arguing against it is that its being championed by Trump, who is admittedly a bombastic personality.
My opinions on tariffs long predates Trump. I have similar opinions against property taxes against individual ownership as well. I don't think that you should be at risk of losing personal property for the simple fact that you survived another year.
I said "extended" not "opened". That's indeed intentional. Please don't use a strawman to avoid addressing the point I'm actually making.
Michelin invested significantly in the site recently and BMW added a ton of EV manufacturing capacities, we are talking of a 1.7 billions dollars investment.
All of this is linked to subsidies they got through the IRA on top of local South Carolina subsidies. They had to do these investments to remain competitive in the US market as the subsidies are tied to local manufacturing and the conditions significantly limit what parts they can import. It was a direct attack on European manufacturing masquerading as green investments.
Downvoted for a factual comment, I see the usual denial on the basis of party lines is still as strong as ever in the US. Here is a bunch of sources for the few who might be interested:
You need this amount of control to be able to properly filter and secure things. Wayland actually learnt that from X security extensions failure.
To me, Wayland failures are more on the organisational and change management part. In inside, it would probably have been better to provide a core library rather a reference implementation. Also, a lot of pieces needed to fall into place once the ball started rolling and some of them like PipeWire took quite some time to be ready.
The sorry fragmentation and complete unwillingness to work together of the various Linux DE also didn't help. I think Gnome constant NIH syndrome and overall capture of Freedesktop has a lot to do with where we are.
Oppo and OnePlus have around 10 days with a full Android Wear system using a clever hybrid technologie running another low powered OS when Wear is not required.
The market is very different nowadays than when the Pebble came out.
First, this vote by the commission is a mockery of the EU own rule. The commission is not competent for comprehensive deal mixing trade and cooperation and splitting the deal like they have done at behest of Germany is a disgrace and likely illegal. I hope and fully expect the ECJ to strike this down.
Second the content of the deal is completely outdated. No mirror close while the EU tightened their own rules so much is insane. The alleged safe guards are completely insuffisant. We are basically saying it's ok for a foreign sellers to do things we ban here. It's even more insane when you consider that it's Bayer actually selling the banned pesticides and they are amongst the companies benefiting the most from the deal.
Third the market we are supposedly opening to Europe have already moved on. European automakers already have factories in the Mercosur so exports won't move. The only things which will change is how expensive it is to ship parts so the deal is basically lining up the margins of auto companies with no local job increase. That leaves pharmaceutical and industrial machineries but even there Europe is quickly losing ground to China and India. The commission knows that and pivoted into pretending the deal is actually about securing source of raw materials like lithium from Argentina but ironically the main consumers of this lithium in Europe will be Chinese companies factories in Hungary. We are destroying the livelihood of our farmers, a fully local part of the economy, to help China.
Fourth the deal affects various countries in a massively unequal way with clear losers and counties which incorrectly think they win. I can't stop noticing that it's always the same country blocking common investments, blocking transfers, using the common currency and internal devaluation to prop up its exports at the expense of its neighbors, killing common procurement to try to favour its own industrial base, currently trying to destroy our space industry so moneys go to its startup. So much for the supposed solidarity I guess. There is very little union in the so called European Union.
reply