The almonds that an average person eats in the US account for about 70 liters of water daily. That's already 5% of 1,600, and more than a typical shower.
I think this number is derived from the water used to create all the goods they consume. Let's say every American eats 1lb of beef per day, and nothing else, to create a simple model. Then every American has a water footprint of about 1,850 gallons.
Prosche specifically is facing huge losses, and with this strategy is doomed to die. There are already rumors of potential bancrupcy.
EVs grew 20% globally in 2025, with developing markets surging 40%+.
When EVs under $100,000 can hit sub-2.5-second 0–60 mph (0–100 km/h), all this fake "benefit" talk about exhaust notes and luxury engine refinement sounds exactly like people cheering for Vertu golden buttons at the dawn of the iPhone era.
EVs are growing incredibly fast—despite the West's biggest EV supplier deciding to commit marketing harakiri by alienating half its customer base.
New battery tech has made EVs affordable, and that's why adoption will keep accelerating in China, the EU, and the rest of the world. There'll be some irrelevant fluctuations in the US, but those will eventually even out regardless—because the rest of the world and technological progress will move on with or without them.
we are on the edge of go-to-market of billions of dollars of investments into battery development. It will deliver both much cheaper where needed and more capable batteries on the market. Guess what it will do with legacy cars.
EVs as a whole are growing. Porsche however is struggling because of their "sports car" identity. Taycan sales dropped 22% year-over-year [0], and their 2025 EV sales only rose because the Macan EV is new and they discontinued the gas one in the EU. (Even then: Half of all Macan buyers worldwide went for the 11-year-old gas design over the EV.)
The market for EV sports cars is soft. The Rimac Nevera R broke 24 performance world records and yet nobody wants to buy it [1]. Even the CEO of Rimac has said people want an engine sound. Meanwhile Ferrari can launch an even more expensive gas car and it sells out before its officially announced [2].
I'm pro-EV and my partner owns one. They are practical appliances that are perfect for the 90% of people who just want to get from A to B. But the stats show that it's not just my personal preferences. The average sports car buyer wants an engine and exhaust.
My theory is that people buy mass-market Porsche cars because the 718/911 guys tell everyone how cool these cars are, but not everyone wants or needs a kidney-busting two-seater, so they compromise with a Panamera or Macan.
If there's no electric 718/911 version to hype them up, there’s not going to be any demand. There's also the issue that they're known for their small sporty cars, yet they're trying to sell 5m-long sedans and 'soccer mom' SUVs and failing at it.
The "soccer mom" SUVs are their best sellers and literally saved the company. I beg you to test-drive a Cayenne Turbo GT if you think they can't deliver a sports-car-like experience in a large SUV. Or a Macan GTS (which is only 7" longer than a 911 btw.)
The Taycan is pretty close to being an electric 911. There's a 718 EV coming out soon but Porsche realized there was not enough demand so now they're retrofitting a gas engine into the design.
The lack of demand for the 718 EV boils down to EVs being heavy, and therefore less chuckable than the gas one, and the lack of soul & engagement in cars without an engine. Solid state batteries will eventually solve the first problem. I'm not sure how we can solve the second one. Perhaps kids of today will grow up caring less about mechanical sounds.
German cars have lost their technological edge. They can't even build their own infotainment systems anymore. They're paying billions to China to do it for them.
I can't overstate how catastrophically stupid this is. Paying what they consider smaller competitors real cash to build core software, instead of developing that capability in-house or acquiring a few startups with decent engineering talent.
This isn't just a bad decision. It reveals a completely dysfunctional decision-making process and a total absence of technical ambition.
People who say but "Porche/Mercedes/etc.." has this design. Luxury segment is not coming from nowhere. This is the same reason british luxury cars are gone essentially. It will take some time, but EU built cars will be in a constant decline.
What's even more fun, they don't want to protect their own market the same way chinese did.
> instead of developing that capability in-house or acquiring a few startups with decent engineering talent.
It's usually the former and their infotainment stuff is usually nothing to get excited about. When they buy startups they get bogged down and burn off the talent quickly.
Maybe the solution is not having the same small set of car companies trying to pull off the survival balancing act as we did a century ago, maybe that's why China is progressing quicker.
Their biggest brand, BYD, is also relatively the "oldest."
It's the governemt priorities, local gov in China is building EV companies, AI companies. EU governemnt, US local gov is building shelters, or people who kick out people from a shelter on a voters mood swing.
A friend from the EU visited recently. He said, "At least the Netherlands is doing much better than 10 years ago...we have lights, roads."
That one sentence captures the entire mindset gap.
The bitter irony: Philips literally built ASML and TSMC, then sold both. Now those companies dominate global semiconductor supply chains while Philips sells... healthcare equipment at a loss.
And ASML is about to lose it's dominance too.
But yeah...lights on the streets. Built with Chinese LEDs. Powered by Chinese solar panels. Bought using budget deficits. In debt.
And the deficit keeps growing. Some EU countries faster, some slower. But the trend is unmistakable.
My homecountry the Netherlands is the worst. The push for becoming 'small America' had us sell of everything we could possibly be proud off to other countries, including the US (mostly Blackrock and Vanguard) and India and China. Privatize everything because it works so well in the US, sell it all (private and public) off to the highest bidder and hope for globalization and the market. NL is doing well economy wise still, but I wonder how much better we could've done if we kept it all to grow.
I studied math at the University of Eindhoven which, at the time, basically meant you would work at Philips or one of its companies. I did not and in hindsight I don't think I could've handled the downfall of that company up close.
The US didn't privatize everything: it was largely private to begin with. The US had a near laissez-faire economy until the WW1-WW2 era. The 1850 to 1910 era is incredibly devoid of government regulations on the economy, which was of course undergoing a gigantic industrial expansion. European states were not formed in any manner similar to the US. The modern European nation was largely constructed in the post WW1 and post WW2 environment, they were heavily remade by the wars and what came after, including their social welfare structures and their various private/public ownership models. If you go back and look at the governing structures of most any of the European powers prior to WW2, they were nearly all: kingdoms or fascist. The US is floating on centuries of continually accumulating cruft, whereas most of the European nations have had hard break points where they reset the board and started fresh.
I did not mean that; i meant NL thought all privatised would be better looking at the US so they did (mostly). So they took the US as blueprint rather than repeat their steps.
That generation is the worst across Europe. They sold out entire industries, bought up all the land, let in millions of immigrants. Then they demanded to be kept alive during COVID, leading to massive overspending and health care premiums rising.
In return, they raised rents and health care premiums are still rising. And they are the last generation with massive egos (early boomer and before).
It hasn't happened yet. However China has demonstrated they can make the same thing now and just need some improvements. Time will tell but it isn't looking good for them long term.
Amen. This is some of the best descriptions of the current mid to upper class mentality in Europe. Frankly, I think only the common man feels what is really happening here.
> They can't even build their own infotainment systems anymore. [...] I can't overstate how catastrophically stupid this is
Car manufacturers have for a very long time acted mostly as integrators and outsourced a vast amount of components, from braking systems to windows, lights, gearboxes alternators starters and other engine parts, electronic harnesses, suspension systems, seats, buttons and others. Lots of conglomerates nowadays even use common frames and engines ("platforms") across brands, developing engines is so expensive that they're sometimes shared across brands that aren't even part of the same groups. Infotainment and electronics are practically never built in-house, but instead purchased from Bosch, Samsung and the likes.
This makes sense, this isn't their specialty, the core market of vehicle buyers buy it for the car, not the infotainment system. Especially when talking about German cars, what they specialize into is the actual power train and quality of assembly. Not the radio.
I’m on engineering side . We are in the same boat.
Writers become more productive = less writers needed not 0 but less.
That’s current step. Now if the promise of cursor that capable of Multi week system to be automated completely. All the internal docs become ai driven .
So only exception are external docs . But … if all software is written by machine there are no readers .
This obviously a vector not a current state :( very dark and gloom
I think we sometimes treat "open" as automatically good without examining the tradeoffs.
You can easily sponsor Iran or Russia killing real people by doing such things.
Powerful tools, once released, can be used by anyone, including those with harmful intentions. And let's be honest: much of open source functions as a way for large companies to cut costs on essential but non-differentiating infrastructure. That's fine, but it complicates the idealistic narrative.
With generative AI, these questions matter more. Maybe it's time to revisit what open source should mean in this context.
who told you that mb of ram is a definition of success?
Opus was out only few months, and it will take time to get this new wave to market. i can assure you my team become way more productive because of opus. not a single developer but an etnire team.
It's a definition of what runs and what not on consumer grade computers, Discord has a routine that now checks if memory goes over a certain threshold and eventually restart itselfs, this is a measure of engineering total failure imo
you don't need CC to do exact same thing in a much more complete environment(cursor), with nice GUI, plugins ecosystem of entire VS code vs just a cli tool built against core UNIX priciples : CLI is good at doing one thing, GUI is for something more complex. CC is mixing two paradims...
I really can't not stand sub par copy paste expereince , bad text positioning etc. Why settle?
reply