I see. You said somewhere you're Gen Z, right? I'm 30 now, maybe a couple years older than you.
Poland seems pretty solid these days. Visited Gdansk and Warsaw this year. They still respect men and masculinity. Cleaner and safer than Scandinavia. Strong economic growth compared to rest of Europe, I think.
I felt similar to you for much of my life living in Norway. Conformism, cowardice and NPC mentality everywhere. A narrow set of acceptable opinions and actions. Aggressive ambition or curiosity interpreted as insanity or malice. You're either part of the 95% that conform, or met with blank stares and suspicion by them.
Denmark feels better. A bit more direct and individualistic. Like as long as you're not hurting anyone, you can be yourself and people won't mind, or might even be curious.
I decided to switch career to engineering, so am studying and working in DK now, second year at uni, acing most courses so far, and aiming for an MS in the US with scholarship. Life is way better than it used to be.
Feel free to DM if you wanna connect or brainstorm sometime. You seem aware for your age and write really well.
@brian_armstrong Yeah, great game and was a great show. I think it's essentially a game of making local decisions, with limited information and limited resources, in a way that optimally compounds over many turns.
@dhh@alexpwrd@OmarchyLinux@lexfridman It would be nice if the speakers worked with Omarchy on the new XPS 13 I bought on your recommendation..
https://t.co/EHLUiGqqYa
Love almost everything else.
@perlausten I'm a DTU student in Copenhagen. Saw @dhh keynote on campus last year. Also installed Omarchy on my 2019 MBP and love it.
Wanna make a group chat with anyone here who responds they're in, and try to arrange it? I could try to tap into the DTU network and get people to come.
Should be possible to get 30 signups, hold David to his promise, and create an awesome little local event 😃
@dhh Seriously considering XPS & Omarchy. Reading the stability isn't the greatest and breaks on updates tho, people end up spending a lot of time fixing it.. Should I be concerned about that?
Going to failure is absolutely not needed, and probably unwise unless lifting for competition, due to wear and tear and elevated risk of injury.
I'm slightly below 6'1, ~200lbs, lean with a 6-pack, great shape. Been lifting consistently for 15 years (since I was 15).
I lift 1-2 times per week, basically only do 6-7 exercises total (mainly pullups, pushups, DB rows, standing shoulder press, forward-walking lunges, and plank), and use maybe 60-70% of the weight I could.
Focus on perfect technique - slow and controlled in the eccentric phase, explosive and controlled in concentric phase.
Works great for building muscle without draining me much. Used to lift max, but this seems way better (for me).
Also ~10k steps per day and occasional uphill sprints.
@bayneframer Some mental benefit to being at a level of strength, size and combat sports ability that would allow you to kill like 98% of people in unarmed combat.
Basically only requires working out once or twice a week for years, which is fine if you kinda enjoy working out.
Space launch was a clear case where there was a large difference in efficiency between what was possible and what was done in practice before SpaceX. A large part of that was due to everything being locked in to what (just barely) already worked, with huge risk aversion. WIth national prestige or a half billion dollar geosync satellite on the line, speculative engineering ideas that might result in a public debacle were not welcome.
When failure is not an option, success can stay very expensive. You need to experiment to improve, and that fundamentally means being comfortable with failure. If you know it is going to work, it isn’t an experiment.
I have long believed that nuclear power today is in precisely the same state as space launch two decades ago, but the even more pressing question now is if semiconductor fabrication might also be.
On the one hand, Moore’s Law has been a sequence of heroic miracles of technology at the wafer fabrication level, grinding out hundreds of compounding small improvements.
On the other hand, fabs are “too big to fail”, and there are elements of extreme conservatism at play. Intel’s “Copy exactly!” fab development exemplifies that mindset – instead of every new building being an opportunity to explore and optimize processes, it was deemed more valuable to just replicate.
While each individual machine may be straining against physical limits of technology, it is possible that the systems orchestrating them all together could be far from optimal.
The explore / exploit axis is fundamental to all decision making, but human risk avoidance probably biases away from optimal exploration.