> In 2020, 70% of the population in the EU lived in a household owning their home, while the remaining 30% lived in rented housing.
So it does not seem like the price situation is as dire as you suggest, though Germany is on the lower end of the ownership scale.
Personally, I had a flatmate (rented a room) for one year during my studies, but I don't know anyone currently living with flatmates. Plus, it's not like you have to live in the middle of the capital, thanks to extensive public transport
Thanks for the link, intresting. I must be missing something, how do these stats square with home prices being in the 200-500-infinity range ballpark and, a very decent for Europe, salary being 50 thousand euro or so?
Oh, and all these news reports saying how young Europeans have to live with their parents until their thirties?
Denmark doesn't have submarines, if that's what you mean. We had two, one which even served in connection with the US led invasion of Iraq, but they got retired in the early 2000s:
Not that it matters, regardless of whose subs you are referring to, since the US military already has free access to Greenland thanks to previous agreements with Denmark. See e.g.
It wouldn't completely prevent data-loss, but most "normal" people would be a lot better off if they simply copied their important files to an external HDD or flash drive on a regular basis
Flash drives are less than ideal for backups. I think when they are stored cold i.e. unpowered, flash memory only retains data for a couple of years. Spinning hard drives are way more reliable for the use case.
That's true. But if they are stored unpowered for a couple of years, then you clearly aren't doing regular backups. OTOH, it's doesn't seem unlikely that the average person would leave a disk gathering dust, so advising people to use a regular HDD is probably the best approach
> if they are stored unpowered for a couple of years, then you clearly aren't doing regular backups
I am doing regular backups yet I have a few backup disks unpowered for years. They are older, progressively smaller backup HDDs I keep for extra redundancy.
Every 2-4 years I am getting a larger backup drive, and clone my previous backup drive to the new one. This way when the backup drive fails (happened around 2013 because I was unfortunate to get notoriously unreliable 3TB Seagate), I don’t lose much data if at all because most of the new stuff is still on the computers, and the old stuff is left on these older backup drives.
I do basically the same, but instead of keeping everything around I just keep the last two drives in rotation at the same time: One kept at home and one kept at work. One of them failed recently, while I was performing a backup, so I just got a new (and larger) drive, and synced it with the other backup drive before continuing as usual
This is it, the odds of both main drive and external failing at the same time are low enough for most people. As long as youre regularly backing up and therefore catching if the external has failed.
As long as it is not automatic, this probably is the only working solution. Pair of USB disks that are rotated and manually copied into. Note to self: mark in my callendar backup days.
Using cloud services, in addition to local backups, is an easy way to guard against events that could damage both your PC and your local backups. Such as fire, flooding, electrical failures, or theft
Yeah, exactly. The vast majority of the time having a backup saves you. Microsoft just managed to make a product so bad it harms users. It's like if you installed a smoke alarm, only for it to short circuit and start a fire. In these cases, the "protection" is the cause of the harm. Bafflingly bad.
Only because he didn’t understand how “syncing” works, and deleted the files in the cloud which deleted them off his computer. The “file loss” was pure user error.
The firehose only ever pointed at "everyone" back when Valve was hand-picking every game that got released on Steam. Back then we only saw a few games released every week, and because of that they got that much more attention. But that also meant that most games never got any attention on Steam, since they were never released there.
However, Valve has since removed most barriers to entry and these days Steam sees more than 350 releases every week (nearly 20k in 2025), a number that is constantly growing. Add to the fact that there are already more than 130,000 games on Steam, that every new release has to compete with, and it is no wonder that median sales are low:
The low barrier to entry means that a lot of crappy games being released on Steam, that were never going to sell a lot, and the actually good games have to compete with all the other good games on the platform, that are probably also being sold at a much greater discount than your newly released title
You could use pixi instead, as a much nicer/saner alternative to conda: https://pixi.sh
Though in this particular case, you don't even need conda. You just need python 3.13 and a virtual environment. If you have uv installed, then it's even easier:
git clone https://github.com/apple/ml-sharp.git
cd ml-sharp
uv sync
uv run sharp
The hate is so irrational I can’t stop feeling that any project that even uses Conda HAS to be terrible. Like a chef that creates a recipe with shit as an ingredient. I could exchange the shit for sugar, but why bother, the chef is obviously insane.
I’m really sorry if anyone that worked in this ever reads this. But Conda is just triggering me.
PyPy is hamstrung by a limited (previously, a lack of) compatibility with compiled Python modules. If it had been a drop-in replacement for the equivalent Python versions, then it'd probably have been much more popular
You can also use pixi[1] if you want conda with uv's solver, that does appears to be faster than the mamba solver. Though the main reasons I recommend pixi, are that it doesn't have a tendency to break random stuff due to polluting your environment by default, and that it does a much better job of making your environments reproducible, among another benefits
I live in a higher cost-of-living city than Berlin, and could easily make it through the month on 1860 EUR, once rent and utilities have been paid
reply