Usually people already live there and have normal jobs. Some big attraction is commercialised, a company (often but not always from outside the community) profits off of it. People like it so more and more keep coming, causing prices to jump. Slowly but surely people can't afford housing. Normal businesses that do normal work can't remain competitive when their offices get much more expensive, so they depart too, leaving only more tourism-focused companies to be profitable. The locals have to choose between leaving their home or joining the companies that ruined it.

Mass tourism industries do provide a lot of income for businesses that profit off it. But to do so those businesses have cannibalised the actual life and economic activity of the location. Nice for the businesses, less so for the people who just wanted to live and have a normal job in their home town...

Looks like Europe will finally have something to thank JD Vance for. I have a few suggestions for European politicians he should publicly support next.

(serious note: good job Hungary, obviously the real work was done by the Hungarian people who needed no external encouragement, it was just such low hanging fruit)

Me, checking what the damage is: oh good, my European defence stocks went up 2 to 4 percent today while the American stocks are tanking, happy days!

Me, after thinking on it a bit longer: oh God, my European defence stocks went up while the world economy is taking a hit, better get ready for whatever's coming

I remember a few weeks ago Dutch pension funds sold all their Tesla stock because they felt it wasn't a safe investment anymore. The decision was laughed at on reddit because Tesla still went up a little bit after that, clearly it was a political choice and the uncertainty was just an excuse, surely the Dutch people would be annoyed that politics cost them big gains on their pensions, etc etc.

I feel vindicated. Let's see how low it can go!

The American government and their supporters hate modern day Europe, and yet they're so obsessed with gaudy replication of old European stuff. You see it also with all the kitchy Roman-like pillars and replicas of the statue of David randomly plonked in some room. It's just so... weird. I guess they like the idea of "old" Europe, the good old days when they still spent half their time killing each other, and the other half killing people in far-away places. They probably see it as their own origin story, so they resent that the modern versions of these countries, after all the devastating wars, have evolved into modern, peaceful countries. Maybe they see themselves as defenders against modern debauchery like freedom, peace and happiness?

From my perspective it just seems kind of hollow and desperate, can't think of your own stuff to do so you decide to copy the megalomania of dysfunctional old empires that got crushed by their own ego and inability to peacefully coexist in prosperity. There's a reason they're not around anymore, and copying them, aside from being vaguely pitiful, just means you're headed to the same end. Let's hope it won't take two world wars for America to catch on.

I miss being able to make embarrassing mistakes without the risk of it being recorded and shared with the world. It's not even that I make a lot of them, or that anyone would care, I just hate the principle that anything could potentially be used against you. It's more that the threat itself takes the enjoyment out of being outside, like everyone has to be so guarded and fake all the time.

The first time I saw this was in the early days of YouTube and smart phones, some kids had found a video of a teacher who was peer pressured by some people into very shyly singing a popular song, which they put on YouTube. After that nobody took him seriously anymore.

Note: this is for actual small silly things only, the kind that can happen to anyone. I absolutely do not support people who try to excuse their crimes, harassment or bigotry as "it was just an embarrassing mistake when I was young haha", that sort of thing absolutely should be used against them later.

I don't use Lemmy much anymore nowadays because of this. While it's important an alternative to Reddit exists, so I try to support it, it ironically feels more like a hivemind than Reddit does (ironic because you'd expect the opposite for federated services). I think it's because switching to Lemmy from Reddit requires either idealism or a Reddit ban, both of which disproportionately attract people who feel good when they verbally attack internet strangers for disagreeing with them on 1% of the implicitly agreed upon joint viewpoints. It also strangely reminds me of the feeling I got being part of an old gaming community that was slowly dying out, where eventually only the unpleasant ones who defined their identity based on it were left.

I'm always happy to see there are also people here who dislike this attitude, though, or even to see neutral posts. There is still hope!

That was my first reaction too. I usually try to stop myself from falling into conspiracy thinking, but in this case it's hard to do when a few days prior the Internet has been full with an alleged memo with plans to stage something dramatic for the press at this specific event.

Can't rule out a real attack but at this point I wouldn't exactly say it's the option with the highest probability for this government filled with tv personalities at record low popularity...

I suppose this is karma for me getting too excited about European unity getting a massive boost as a silver lining to the state of the world. My own country is joining Hungary in attempting to sabotage it.

This is not the time to make an ideological show to your populist national electorate. If this doesn't get implemented properly and the newfound unity is not credible, the continent and the EU will be faced with war. Which, if that on its own is not convincing enough, also tends to be somewhat suboptimal for fiscal stability and the economy.

While you are staying, your productivity is fueling the economy, and the taxes you pay go to the government you dislike. If you flee, that's a big economic difference you're making over the years. I guess if you fight symbolically but non-pragmatically and get arrested, they have to feed you and house you in a prison which will cost a little extra, but compared to your non-productivity that's just a small bonus. Fleeing also means you get to proactively contribute to competitors and reward them for being a better place to live, which in a way doubles your economic impact. There's a reason the Berlin wall was built and North Korea executes 3 generations of the families of defectors. People are valuable, and they can't afford to lose too many of them.

On the other hand, if your threshold for fleeing is too low, there are no competitors to support, because every country has their issues, and some may be at a risk of the same developments as the country you're fleeing from, making it a pointless exercise. And your loved ones could be essentially hostages that can be used to make you stay.

So it kind of depends, but at least the cowardice argument seems pointless to me. Pragmatic small-scale effectiveness tends to beat symbolic perfectionism at making an impact.

Ukraine has one of the strongest militaries in Europe. This whole "they couldn't even beat puny Ukraine" line I keep seeing is entirely too haughty for my liking. Their gear is less state-of-the-art, sure, but many European countries lack vital components of a functional military altogether. Including logistics and coordination of joint efforts which the Americans have until recently been doing.

Sure, no need to panic yet, but certainly a need to get a move on and actually respond proactively to make up for gaps, and respond jointly, to ensure that it's not going to be a matter of small countries getting steamrolled one by one.

I am a scientist with a PhD in AI and I'm tired of hearing about it. It's like how I imagine microbiologists would feel if their field was suddenly in the spotlight 24/7 purely because people with something to gain bombard the public with the benefits of biological weapons, which is claimed to be what microbiology is all about. All they wanted to do was learn about how the world works and maybe use that to prevent diseases or something.

The scientific field I love has been hijacked by people who don't understand it and try to use one specific direction in the field to the detriment of the world. I can't blame others for hating my field when all they see of it is this nonsense, I myself hate what is presented as AI just as much.

It feels unfair that we should be the ones to change, but sometimes I really wish we could rebrand the scientific field from the commercial products sharing its name. The problem is that they keep stealing our terms (like "agent") for at best tangentially related concepts too (or present it as their specific product being what a general term means), so there'd be no end to it.

Edit: niche -> direction

I guess I'm not growing old

Very good post, I agree completely! It's easy to let perfect become the enemy of good.

One thing I'd add is that many social media companies sneakily get their trackers added to random web pages or other services you might use, so doing random things on the internet could be included as extra engagement (and it also doesn't require you to be signed up to their service in the first place, though it helps them). In this case their business is the data they collect on your behaviour, even outside of their own services, and the ads they can target to you using this on behalf of other entities who outsource their advertisements. It's quite scary how ubiquitous this is.

I think what OP suggested here is a very good mindset to live by, and it will help a lot. If you wanted to go one step further, you could consider combining this with steps to try and prevent these companies from still harvesting your data when you're not even aware that you're using them, e.g., by blocking such trackers as much as possible.

Of course you're right morally, but it's still an interesting change in tone. This whole thing started when Russia threw a fit about Ukraine wanting closer ties to the EU instead of Russia. Now their official position is that even EU membership is totally fine. Seems like their position weakened quite a bit since 2014.

On the other hand, maybe this means Russia wants to fight the entire EU with their mutual defence pact when they attack again after recovering for a few years through a ceasefire. Or maybe they're gambling that the EU's requirements are too strict for Ukraine to join.

Or maybe it's just all lies again, of course. But still, an interesting weaker flavour of lies, in that case.

I've spent years now trying not to consume products from companies I consider immoral. There are a lot of them and, realistically, you won't make a big dent or bring the company down. The average person is, by definition, average, so a boycott based on people doing the good thing at the expense of some personal discomfort will always fail.

But that doesn't mean it's pointless. Companies like Amazon are almost impossible to compete with because of their size. The most important impact you can have as a consumer is not that the lack of your personal revenue is going to keep the likes of Jeff Bezos up at night. It's that you're providing revenue and a user base to alternative businesses that are struggling to exist in a world where most people just use Amazon.

You can make a real difference this way! Focus on growing competitors rather than hoping the bad company will go away because of your abstention. Kind of like using Lemmy instead of Reddit.

This question changes a lot depending on if the non-EU partner in question is the US or a country like South Korea

While nice, this seems at odds with the budget cuts to science that are horribly undermining our existing, high-quality scientific institutions. It would be much nicer if luring these US-based scientists were an addition to a larger package to invest in, rather than cut and destroy, science in the country.

We could certainly use the help, so they'd be very welcome, but if we're still getting rid of hundreds of fully set up scientists while gaining a few new ones from this, that's still a net loss...

Plus, any US-based scientist who might consider doing this would surely look at these budget cuts, see how countries like France and Germany are actually investing in scientific infrastructure, and take this into account when selecting a destination. If you want to "lure" people over, you do need to have an actual high-quality and functional system to show off.

Korean democracy is not dead yet!

Incredible news! We've been needing this for a long time; the research community has been calling for a "CERN for AI" for years at this point.

As a publicly funded researcher working in this field it's very frustrating to see so many of our excellent, well-educated students in Europe end up contributing to the performance of American tech giants (who then use that power to undermine our democratic society). It is also hard to overstate how dependent we are on American compute infrastructure, for example, Google colab, AWS or Google Earth Engine. This last one is especially frustrating because basically the entire European research community relies on access to a service by an American tech giant to access our own globally leading high-quality public access satellite data.

I've seen a lot of negativity on this news as a waste of money. Personally I'm not too sold on the usefulness of LLMs either, their hype is very much overblown. But investing in AI is not the same as investing in LLMs, and Europe absolutely needs this. AI is being used, and has been for decades, in nearly everything we do. This includes not just LLMs and deep learning, but optimisation, formal logic, all sorts of probabilistic inference, forecasting, robotics, simulation, surrogate modelling, satisfiability, and much more. The correctness of the chips your phone uses has been verified using AI techniques. Weather forecasts and disaster warnings use AI methods. The food you eat has been monitored as it grew using AI. Air travel and general infrastructure needs AI to function, much of manufacturing and design needs it, etc etc. These are not just the chat bot "assistants" that tech companies try to push so hard on the public, but computational methods that answer vital questions we cannot otherwise answer.

Being dependent on a country like the US (or China) for something this pervasive and important is a terrible idea. Compute infrastructure, central hubs of expertise, and continental instead of national scale investment opportunities all contribute strongly to European sovereignty in this regard, for all the fields mentioned above (not just the over-hyped ones).