• 0 Posts
  • 25 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 15th, 2023

help-circle

  • What you are mentioning is forcing companies to comply when selling inside the EU or California. The EU does not force companies to comply with their specifications outside of the EU. Companies simply do so because it is convenient.

    The EU cannot decide how cars should be made that are sold in California. If they tried, I bet the US government would have something to say about it.

    What the EU can do, is exert influence to get other governments to adopt the same rules. This already happens with a lot of countries surrounding the EU. But asking another government to adopt rules, is wildly different from forcing companies to adhere to those rules inside the borders of another government.


  • Not entirely. There still exists trade agreements, and diplomatic pushback.

    Forcing companies to make products to a certain specification, would mean the EU is attempting to regulate other markets. Markets it has no direct governance over. While it may come from good intentions, it still invades the authonomy of the governments that should have governance over these markets.

    Much better would be to work together with other countries, and help these countries implement similar rules, and enforce them together. Like, pretty much that the EU is doing for its members in the first place.



  • The problem with C++ is not the lack of safety features. It’s the ever lasting backwards compatibility that is keeping it both alive and down at the same time.

    Having to support 50 year old code, is going to limit any restriction you place. But it is usually the restrictions that make a language good.

    Example: You can write perfectly good modern C++ code without any pointers. But pointers are so ingrained into the language, that it is impossible to remove them.









  • I will not justify the price increase of this post, but the high margins kinda do make sense to me.

    The average profit that youtube makes on a gigabyte worth of video data, is much much lower than that 98.7%. There is such a vast amount of random crap being uploaded, that the content creators that actually generate views, hence revenue, must bear a huge sinkhole of costs for youtube. The same holds for Twitch: streams with only a handfull of watchers cost Twitch money. But it is a double edged sword. Because the reason these content creators are as big as they are, is because they could start from nothing, and upload for free. The big guys support vast amounts of amateurs trying to become big. It is probably one of the most socialistic models we have in our current capitalistic market.

    That being said: Youtube is getting shittier in an attempt to sqeeze this model for extra profit.