No, simple answer. Try it, link to the repo and I will tell you all the placed it failed. Vibe coding has its places. For something like pocketbase it most definitely is not ready yet.
AfD has f'd up views on many things. I wouldn't even be surprised if they would vote for it, as soon as they are in a position of power. However in its current state, they would hurt themselfs with a chat control law. So yes, your a right. I would also not expect them to vote for it.
AfD is consistently the pro-choice and pro-personal-freedom party in Germany. They are the only party advocating for an unrestricted American-style free speech and against all kinds of government mandates that other mainstream political parties are pushing.
You may disagree (or agree) with many of their other views, but as an opposition party, they are precisely the corrective Germany and Europe need to keep the power-hungry elites in check.
As an American currently in Germany, the food situation is soooo much better here and they would do well to not allow incorrect or misleading labels on consumer products. I understand what you’re saying about censorship, but this is a pretty weak example, IMO. We had something similar in the US with attempts to ban the word “milk” from “almond milk” [0]. Are there other examples that are more egregious?
It’s not misleading in any way for consumers though. The consumer protection agency in Germany explicitly stated that no consumers have been confused so far (https://www.wiwo.de/100160889.html). The vegan/vegetarian sausages such as the soja sausage, which Konrad Adenauer invented more than 100 years ago, are in a completely different section and shelf in the supermarket and clearly marked as vegetarian. This law is a clear example of the government banning people from calling their products what they are and it is the opposite of free speech.
I dont understand that view : peanut butter, coconut milk, cacao butter and plenty, plenty others exemples exist probably since languages apparition. A vegetal burger shouldn’t be called beef burger obviously but we all know what almond milk means. The misleading argument isn’t serious but an attempt to block a cultural changes some don’t like or profit from.
Also, in regards to the “cow corpse flesh” comment, I think we (particularly Americans) are far too detached from the fact that eating meat is downstream from killing an animal. If we had more appreciation for that fact, perhaps we would be eating more plant-forward meals. Whether or not that would lead to a decrease in obesity or other co-morbidities would be interesting to test.
I wouldn't assume this to be their position were they already in power. They however need votes to get into power to implement that takeover. Parties like this inherently need to run on a (deceptive) populist platform for the plan to work.
While you can force law abiding people to give up their encryption because it's against the law there's no way to prevent encryption from being used by people that are already violating several laws...
However, for the same reason, it's in everybody else's best interest that an organisation that might be taken over by fascists not have access to a panopticon.
I think that "everybody else" include literal fascists. Nazi's Gestapo had serious issues with Wernher von Braun to the point Hitler had to be bothered. East Germany's Stasi had more personnel per capita than Russian KGB had. They would know that a secret police in a German state isn't a great idea regardless of ideology.
Had Hitler not able to stop Gestapo from sending von Braun to a death camp, not only history of spaceflight would have been delayed by decades, but the associated reputational bonuses to postwar Germany as "genius tech nerds that made a gross mistake" had been way lower. Not having the panopticon and just keeping freedom of speech and privacy as they are removes that type of risk. No way that serious neo-Nazis wouldn't think about that.
> No way that serious neo-Nazis wouldn't think about that.
Unless Germany's serious neo-Nazis are especially wiser than America's equivalent far-right groups (which have played the political game well enough to achieve significant power already), I am not sure current evidence supports this supposition.
"Der Verfassungsschutz belegt Bestrebungen gegen das Demokratieprinzip in der AfD. Auf allen Ebenen der Partei wird demnach die demokratische Nachkriegsentwicklung der Bundesrepublik diffamiert sowie der Staat und die Parteien verunglimpft. „Gewichtigen Teilen der Partei“ geht es „nicht mehr um eine scharfe kritische Auseinandersetzung in der Sache“. Stattdessen soll das Vertrauen in die verfassungsmäßige Ordnung „von Grund auf erschüttert“ werden, damit „die freiheitliche demokratische Grundordnung als Ganzes fragwürdig erscheine“.
Der Verfassungsschutz belegt Bestrebungen gegen das Rechtsstaatsprinzip in der AfD. In der Partei wird demnach die Gewaltenteilung abgelehnt, das staatliche Gewaltmonopol infrage gestellt und sich auf ein vermeintlich legitimes Widerstandsrecht berufen. Einerseits ergeben diese Aussagen laut Gutachten „kein verfestigtes Bild innerhalb der Gesamtpartei“. Andererseits wäre die Verwirklichung der „menschenwürdewidrigen und diskriminierenden Vorstellungen letztlich nicht ohne eine Verletzung des Rechtsstaatsprinzips umsetzbar“."
"Bei einer Kundgebung in Merseburg (ST) am 25. Mai 2020 konstatierte Daniel Wald (MdL, ST), dass im Zuge der Corona-Maßnahmen eine „Gesundheitsdiktatur“ errichtet worden sei, gegen die er zum Widerstand aufrief:
„Die Not unseres Volkes fordert nicht mehr nur Worte, sondern endlich Taten. Wir sind deshalb keine Verschwörungstheoretiker. Im Gegenteil: Wir sind Verschwörer. Wir verschwören uns als Bürger, als echte Opposition, als ganzes Volk gegen den Komplex aus Systemmedien, Gewerkschaften und Altparteienfilz, die sich unseren Staat schon längst zur Beute gemacht haben. Wir, die AfD, stehen dabei an der Spitze des Widerstands, bis in diesem Volk wieder eine Politik gemacht wird, die im Dienste unseres Volkes steht.“"
There are hundreds of statement verifying their goals of a violent takeover. They don't respect any of the democratic institution. They refer positiv to Nazi germany. They are connected to the literal Nazis of today.
So .. you are saying because modern fascists seldom use the term fascist for themself, they ain't no fascist?
Well, to me it is enough if people subscribe openly to all the main ideology of Hitlers party and that time in general.
If it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck and swims like a duck, it is a duck.
Höcke can be officially called a Fascist due to his statements. Was he removed from the party? Or shunned even a little?
Not as far as I am aware.
If a party negates the democratic foundations of the state they are - they do, see the quotes
If they connect with people and organisations who openly call for the nationalistic revolution - they do, see the quotes.
And if the Verfassungsschutz collects all that and labels them "largely radical right extremism" .. then it say exactly what I was saying. Preparation for a violent uprising. Just not in immediate action, otherwise they would be forbidden.
It's not that the so-called "modern fascists" don't use the term, it's that the VS does not even use the term. Not that it matters because it lost any meaning anyway.
Also the AfD does not subscribe to the main ideology of Hitlers party. Did you read the party's program? Where in god's name do you find anything in there that can be compared to the program of the NSDAP? The AfD is in large parts much more liberal than any of the other parties when it comes to the economic side of things. The AfD is also not against immigration per se, as long as it provides a benefit for teh country. Much like countries like Canada do. If you don't believe me, watch some speeches from their members, for instance the one that took place in Hannover a while ago. Don't believe just randomly what some leftist ARD/ZDF journalists want you to believe.
DieLinke on the other hand is a direct follow-up party from the SED. They want to end our capitalistic system and replace it with democratic socialism. That's 1:1 SED.
Anway, coming to Höcke. Höcke is far-right. For sure. Is he extreme? Does he want to use violence? Nope. I don't think so. It looks like people elect him in a demogratic elections. Does he say things that are on the edge? Sure! Is that his right: YES! If you don't like him, then don't vote for him. Attack his arguments with your own arguments. Labelling him fascist is a poor tactic and doesn't mean anything anymore anyway.
And you know. You base your arguments on the Verfassungsschutz. I think its a biased agency that should be removed from power as soon as possible. Same as with most of the judges, especially the radical left judges in Berlin. And I know, I know, you will call this now "anti-democratic" or whatever. Well, in a democracy, it is my RIGHT and my DUTY to critique the powers that be. That also includes the judges. Left wingers did that as well, until they successfully conducted their marche throught the institutions. Now, they LOVE the institutions. Don't believe me? The Greens SUED at the Verfassungsgericht, I think in 1983, AGAINST Germanys entry in the EU. Together with the Republicans. The reason? The EU is anti-democratic. Well, they lost because the Verfassungsgericht was pro-EU back then. However, now they LOVE the EU. Were TheGreens now less democratic than they are now? Were TheGreens "fascists" or "Nazis" or whatever you wanna call them becasue they dared to critize the institutions? The answer is no. And so aren't people that are critizing the current institutions.
And finally, to the guy claiming that I am a troll and that my posts are hidden. That's bs. I posted here maybe 10 times. And I am not a troll but a sincere citizen who just happens to really like the AfD and what it stands for.
You only become a Verdachtsfall when your organization is deemed to want to dismantle the state, get rid of rule of law or want to erase basic human rights.
Everytime this comes up, I am on the opposite site of this. It is clearly full self driving. It can stop at red lights, cross intersections, make turns, park, drive, change lanes, break and navigate on its own. There are various videos online where FSD managed to drive a route start to finish without a single human override. That's full self driving. It can also crash like humans "can" and that why it needs supervision. In this sense, we as humans are also "full self driving" with a much (?) lower risk of crashing.
Like also everytime let the downvotes rain. If you downvote, it would be nice, if you could tell me where I am wrong. It might change my view on things.
> It is clearly full self driving. It can stop at red lights, cross intersections, make turns, park, drive, change lanes, break and navigate on its own. That's full self driving
All this demonstrates is the term “full self driving” is meaningless.
Tesla has a SAE Level 3 [1] product they’re falsely marketing as Level 5; when this case occurred, they were misrepresenting a Level 2 system as Level 4 or 5.
If you want to see true self driving, take a Waymo. Tesla can’t do that. They’ve been lying that they can. That’s gotten people hurt and killed; Tesla should be liable for tens if not hundreds of billions for that liability.
Do you think anyone makes the same error when they see a "self cleaning" oven?
There's plenty wrong about the FSD terminology and SAE levels would absolutely be clearer, but I doubt more than a tiny fraction of people are confused as to the target of 'self' in the phrase 'full self driving'.
> Do you think anyone makes the same error when they see a "self cleaning" oven?
How many juries and courts have ruled adversely against self-cleaning oven makers?
Tesla has absolutely lied about its software's capabilities. From the lawsuit that went to trial:
“In 2016, the company posted a video of what appears to be a car equipped with Autopilot driving on its own.
‘The person in the driver's seat is only there for legal reasons,’ reads a caption that flashes at the beginning of the video. ‘He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself.’ (Six years later, a senior Tesla engineer conceded as part of a separate lawsuit that the video was staged and did not represent the true capabilities of the car.) [1]”
To be 100% clear: FSD and Autopilot are both terrible product names that imply promises greater than the products can deliver, and Musk / Tesla have made that worse with statements like those you reference. People have died as a result.
I just disagree that any significant number of people anywhere have thought the 'self' in 'full self driving' refers to the driver.
That's something different. The problem with the level is, that it only focuses on the attention the human driver needs to give to the automation. In this sense my Kia EV6 is also Level 2/3, same as FSD. However FSD can do so much more than my Kia EV6. That's a fact. Still the same level. Where did Tesla say FSD is SAE Level 5 approved? They would be responsible everytime FSD is active during a crash. Tesla is full self driving with Level 2/3 supervision and in my opinion this is not missleading.
Also "All this demonstrates is the term “full self driving” is meaningless." prooves my point that it is not missleading.
> FSD can do so much more than my Kia EV6. That's a fact. Still the same level
The levels are set at the lowest common denominator. A 1960s hot rod can navigate a straight road with no user input. That doesn’t mean you can trust it to do so.
> Where did Tesla say FSD is SAE Level 5 approved?
They didn’t say that. They said it could do what a Level 5 self-driving car can do.
“In 2016, the company posted a video of what appears to be a car equipped with Autopilot driving on its own.
‘The person in the driver's seat is only there for legal reasons,’ reads a caption that flashes at the beginning of the video. ‘He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself.’ (Six years later, a senior Tesla engineer conceded as part of a separate lawsuit that the video was staged and did not represent the true capabilities of the car.) [1]”
> Tesla is full self driving with Level 2/3 supervision and in my opinion this is not missleading
This is tautology. You’re defining FSD to mean whatever Tesla FSD can do.
How would you name a system which can do everything a Level 5 system can, but with Level 2/3 supervision? A name, which a PR team would choose without the missleading stuff as you are saying.
> How would you name a system which can do everything a Level 5 system can, but with Level 2/3 supervision?
FSD cannot “do everything a Level 5 system can.” It can’t even match Waymo’s Level 4 capabilities, because it periodically requires human intervention.
But granting your premise, you’d say it’s a Level 2 or 3 system with some advanced capabilities. (Mercedes has a lane-keeping and -switching product. They’re not constantly losing court cases.)
But this speaks to the fundamental point the other commenter is making. A Waymo requires human intervention periodically too. It's just less than a Tesla with FSD, which is in turn less than a Tesla with Autopilot, which is dramatically less than my 20 year old truck. It's just that at some point we assume the probability of a crash is low enough that the human driver can zone out and hope for the best and nobody has the balls to come out and actually define an acceptable probability of serious injury or death to set an actually useful performance standard based on this.
It needs to have a crash rate equal to or ideally lower than a human driver.
Tesla does not release crash data (wonder why...), has a safety driver with a finger on the kill switch, and only lets select people take rides. Of course according to Elon always-honest-about-timelines Musk, this will all go away Soon(TM) and we will have 1M Robotaxis on the road by December 31st.
Completing a route without intervention doesn't mean much. It needs to complete thousands of routes without intervention.
Keep in mind that Waymos have selective intervention for when they get stuck. Teslas have active intervention to prevent them from mowing down pedestrians.
When I'm sitting next to a sober driver, I generally expect I can trust the driver and don't necessarily need to pay attention all the time and call for attention when necessary.
Are you saying you would sit in a Tesla without paying much attention, in the same way you're sitting next to someone you trust driving the car? Would you go do phone stuff or look for stuff in your bag while your Tesla is driving you?
I mean I guess people are doing that, but with all the reports and stories I hear, it seems to me it's quite tricky, and you better just watch the road.
So I wouldn't really call that fully self driving. It's kind of like an LLM, it does great most of the time, but occasionally it does something disastrous. And therefore a human needs to be there to correct it. If you would let it all go on it's own it's not gonna end well. That's not fully self driving. That's human assisted driving.
That is exactly my issue. I am more districted while being more productive. It feels just wrong, but works for now. In the long run, I need to find a solution for this. What works best for now, is to let multiple agents run on multiple repos of the same project solving different tasks. This way, I stay somewhat focused, since I constantly need to approve things. Just like a Projekt Manager with a big team... Indeed curious times.
Yes, this makes sense, since most distros use a "standard release" system. The intention behind it is to keep your OS stable and only apply security patches at some point.
If you want to have a system with always the newest software, you need to use a "rolling release " system. I think Arch Linux is the most popular (arch user btw). This is much more fun, if you know what you are doing. Otherwise you will end up with a broken system pretty fast. Ofc you can fix it, but depending on experience and skill something like Ubuntu is the better choice.
I have a Mammotion Yuba and trust me, the grass looks awesome as a grid or in lines. It can even do logos. So far nicer looking grass and much faster then random.
A genuine Question. Is open hardware even possible at some point? The advances in quality and speed are nothing short but impressive. I started 3d printing stuff in my basement one year ago (Ender V3 Plus). With the quality and speed improvements, comes technology which gets more complex every year. Companies spend millions to archive this. Why would they share it? I remember building drones in my basement (still on my wall) with open source software on the flight controllers. Now I can get a drone from DJI for less money with more features, in a smaller from factor, longer flight time, pre build and under 249g. Ofc this comes at the cost of repairability, control and trust. However I can still buy the hardware I used years ago. If I wanted to, I can build a drone by myself. I guess the same will happen to 3d printers.
It already is. And its been chaotic and amazing at the same time.
We already have open source:
5DoF 3d printers with slicers
Fixed wing and quad/hexa/octocopters
Medical drug fabrication (Four Thieves)
Electrochemical synthesis lab
Open source flow batteries
Stops and starts of industrial tooling (open source ecology)
I'm going to say something that is becoming less and less controversial: copyrights and patents are the real drag here. Individuals can get patents, but can't actually enforce. So they end as weapons as companies go after each other.
Copyright is also often intertwined into patents, so that if a thing isn't covered by a patent, copyright (with firmware) takes over. Then the DMCA and anti-circumvention shit.
The other problem here in the USA is almost impossible to source parts directly, or small fab labs that can do operations.
I was looking for a 5mm thick 500x500mm aluminum plate to be cut. Waterjet, plasma, whatever. I wanted it slightly undercut. I made blueprints in DXF and pdf. I contacted 2 waterjet companies, no response. Contacted a welding company with plasma table. No response. Down the list, no response.
As a creator, how am I supposed to create, when all avenues lead to "source it in China"? That... Is huge.
I think "sourcing internationally" is one thing and avoiding China (or any single country for that matter) is another. The current administration puts a lot of effort on being independent from everyone else. I think that approach is misguided. We have allies and we need them anyways. Unlike the Soviet Union, China has 3x the population of the US. If we want to have weight on the international stage, we need our allies. If we can source pieces from multiple countries and ideally from allies, it's IMO a very minor issue. Always needing pieces that only come from a single country, especially one that's not a liberal democracy, is a much bigger issue.
That said, I think Chinese manufacturing has a huge advantage from factories being close to each other. Getting your PCB for prototyping in a few hours instead of 10 days is a huge advantage.
I'm also not a Sinophobe. I've ordered plenty from China. I even have a XiaoHongShu account.
As an inventor, one thing that greatly speeds up making stuff is a rapid order and getting parts. And in my case, I literally needed a rectangular sheet of aluminum. I did all the CAD work, submitted to local companies who could do it, and not a peep. I would have paid the American premium of getting it made locally.
I'm also not the only person with this problem. I know others who wanted to hire a welder for a 2 hour job. Even went to the Union hall. Nobody. Nada. And the guy was also part of the IBEW as well. Doesn't matter if you're paying.
And again, this was over a metal plate. No powder coating. No special treatment. Nothing.
I know its a very boomerish thing to say, but its like companies in the USA really don't want to work. My thing would have been small. But I would have brought more small fabrication jobs, and informed local makers that they could do this. But no.
"I know its a very boomerish thing to say, but its like companies in the USA really don't want to work. My thing would have been small"
This rings truer than it should. We had a locksmith out to give us an estimate to install several high-security locks that I can only assume would have been fairly good business. Never heard back from them. We didn't bother following up with them either because if they can't even bother writing up the estimate, how can I trust their work?
I wonder if it's a lack of competition in part based on a labor shortage and tight occupational licensing
You could get that for $75 to $150 (depending on lead time and whether you want 5052 or 6061) from SendCutSend or OshCut (both US-based), as long as you're willing to use 3/16 inch (4.7 mm) plate instead of 5 mm. They'll also bend it for you if you want.
But at a higher level you're right: availability of fabrication services in the U.S. is pretty poor, and most shops are optimized for a few larger orders, not small mix orders like yours.
maybe you're just very unlucky because there are a number of places that do this right from their website ( another commenter mentioned sendcutsend as just one example ).
Open hardware for 3D printers is actually thriving.
There's a whole fleet of community designed hardware, with most innovations to consumer 3D printing still originating in the DIY community.
Multiple manufacturers have direct contact with community members to produce custom hardware at a small but affordable scale, and keeping up with rapid iterations and multiple hardware improvements throughout the year.
Some of the most cutting edge as well as niche 3D printing hardware available to consumers are being sold on small webshops operating out of someone's garage.
If anything, we're in a golden age right now. 3D printing in 2025 is a very exciting place to be.
As a person who chose to buy an Elegoo Centauri Carbon rather than upgrade his Ordbot Quantum w/ a heated bed and enclosure and to then try to re-design it to use a CoreXY motion system, I would agree that is exactly the path which we are on --- the new printer came in at a lower price than just the initial parts order for heated bed and enclosure, let alone a different motion system. All of the printers which I wanted (Positron, Prusa Core One) or was considering (Bambu Labs P1S) were over twice or almost twice the price of the ECC.
Think about this question for a second and you'll realize that it's rooted in consumerism. We always want 'quality and speed', but most of all, convenience and apparent low cost (that 'apparent' part is important). What if the product wasn't cheap or the best you could get? What if the product requires more attention than being just a consumer? Conventional wisdom says that they'd be dead on arrival. But consumerism also comes with consumer exploitation.
There are numerous examples of this today. People yearn for dump large LCD panels (cheaper ones, not the ad panels or large monitors) instead of the sluggish, invasive, ad-ridden, irreparable and annoying smart TVs that we have today. Configurable modular laptops and phones like the Framework and Fairphone are enjoying a comeback today after decades of soldered-on components (even the battery), individually paired modules, glued on casings (instead of the convenient screwed on ones), horrendously costly repairs and depressingly short service life. The (paper) printer market is so rife with exploitation that their CEOs consider their customers as 'investments' that are lossy if they don't buy ink cartridges on subscription! Similar story in the automotive sector. People annoyed by full touch screen control panels, heated seats on subscription, parts that cannot be serviced by anyone else.. I could go on for hours.
It's very tempting to give up the reparable and open hardware in favor of mass produced better performing products on account of the cost, effort and time needed to deal with the former. But as their market dries up, the inevitable enshittification of the latter sets in. In pursuit of the continued satisfaction of the shareholders, it's no longer enough for the producers to take hefty margins on each unit you purchase. They move to squeezing every last penny off of you by seeking rent on products that shouldn't be under subscriptions in the first place. Eventually, you end up spending more than if you were using the dumb devices. And then predictably like clockwork, people start lamenting about the feature creep, loss of serviceability, loss of quality and greed.
It's at this point that dumb devices market open up again. The market is small and products are costlier owing to the low scale of production. But they grow a dedicated customer base and healthy revenues that improve over time. So with this hindsight, how about we stick with the open and reparable hardware? If their market doesn't crash, their costs wont rise either. This long term strategic decision can help consumers protect their rights and their savings. But that never happens. This is one scam that the world falls for again and again and again, no matter how many times it plays out.
I think it is something else. If you think about it, humans often write about correcting errors done by others. Refactoring code, fixing bugs and write code more efficient. I guess it triggers other paths in the model, if we write that someone else did it. It is not about pleasing but our constant desire to improve things.
