Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | tonfa's commentslogin

Seems like it's 4 per hour on Rotterdam/Utrecht, seems similar to Geneva/Lausanne with 6 per hour.

In any case, I think commuters are fine with every 15 min, as long as there's enough seats. (for long distance like trains, my feeling is that frequency below 15min doesn't have a lot of impact, unlike shorter distance public transport like tram/bus/subway)


Yeah there's tons of work ongoing. Lots of line close to the big hubs have ongoing construction to eventually switch to 15min takt.

Improvements on various train station (new underground stations in Geneva and Luzern, extra platforms, etc.).

https://company.sbb.ch/en/railway-development/future-rail/na...

(for example, there's also lots of tram, etc. projects)


> The public version of Gemini is ridiculous. At least half their search "answers" are just wrong.

That's not Gemini, that's AI Mode (in Search), they're different products built by fairly different part of Google (actually one is built by Deepmind).

(I don't think it's much comparable to https://gemini.google.com/app at least in the past you'd get very different results)


And it's extremely poor marketing by Google to do this - the general perception people have is that Google AI is dumb due to this.

To be fair, this is classic Google.

As I keep saying, they should win this AI stuff, but I have complete faith in their ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.


Especially after we saw how happy the EU was to negotiate (they didn't budge) when https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Swiss_immigration_initiat... passed.

The new initiative is basically the same, but with no leeway to ignore it.

(that said I suspect if it passes, there will be something tied to the bilateral referendum in 2027/28 to try to supersede it)


> if it passes, there will be something tied to the bilateral referendum in 2027/28 to try to supersede it

This is my thinking, too. If it really comes down to Chexit-or-nothing, we’ll have another referendum.


That was the UK's thinking, too. "We won't have a hard Brexit! Of course they'll negotiate a plan!"

And then the UK delivered an Article 50 notice. That isn’t something this referendum would force.

The UK's referendum was also non-binding, in theory.

> UK's referendum was also non-binding, in theory

If SVP gets control of government they’ll probably try to Chexit irrespective of any referendum power. That’s orthogonal to this question.


Well there's anyway going to be a referendum about the bilateral. (which is why I find the initiative somewhat stupid, you can vote on the real deal in a few years, about whether people want or do not want to have agreements with the EU, instead of hiding it behind a fake/emotional reason)

> This referendum is an attempt by the members of SVP/UDC, the right-most party, to show that on immigration topics they have more popular support than what their relative power

Not really about immigration but EU relationship. Almost every SVP initiative tries to create a contradiction in the constitution with foreign agreements to force an "exit".

> The strong point of the Swiss political system is that the government is, by law, made up by all significant parties.

It's a tradition, not a rule (the composition of the council is simply the result of an election by the parliament).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_formula_(Swiss_politics)


> It's a tradition, not a rule

Amended, thanks!


Germany (16% of recent immigration), followed by France and Italy (12% and 11%).

https://cms.news.admin.ch/fileservice/sdweb-docs-prod-nsbcch...

(page 5)


"the swiss equivalent"

As OP explains, freedom of movement can't be stopped in isolation from the rest of the bilaterals.

(btw funnily Schengen is just about the border control, we're talking about freedom of movement which is a different thing, e.g. UK wasn't in Schengen but the freedom of movement applied to UK as well before brexit, tho I guess people use Schengen interchangeably)


> This is only about the Schengen, Switzerland is not a part of the EU

Not really, the bilateral are a package and the EU doesn't want CH to pick and chose.

If freedom of movement stops, a whole lot of thing also stop. It happened the last time SVP got something similar voted on (introduction of quota for foreign immigration), on a smaller scale (erasmus and horizon which are the higher ed and academic research collaboration, CH was a heavy recipient of the latter).


> the bilateral are a package and the EU doesn't want CH to pick and chose

It really depends who is in power where when and if the 10mm limit is crossed. If there is a conservative in Paris or Berlin, chances are Switzerland can simply abrogate Schengen.


Schengen is a minor treaty about border controls. The actual issue are the Bilateral I agreements, which link free movement with many aspects of free trade. If Switzerland drops that, it needs new free trade agreements, which take many years to negotiate and ratify.

Unlike UK, the impact to the EU is minimum and Switzerland doesn't have leverage (if the EU still stands).

Of course if you have EU dismantlers in power anyway in FR/DE, they'll just be happy to sabotage.


> unless you're Swiss, your opinion is irrelevant

I think we do bilaterally with our trading partners/border friends.

Freedom of movement across the EU has created a massive backlash. Politicians can keep ignoring that. Or they can modify Schengen, perhaps by admitting that FOM makes immigration decisions a collective one. (Germany letting in a massive wave of immigration means a massive wave of immigrants for everyone.)


Where do you pull this kind of nonsense from? This didn't work out for much bigger UK and UK isn't sorrounded by EU.

How did it not work out? A lot of things the EU claimed were red lines ended up being crossed. Look at the Horizon programme. Supposedly an inviolable "privilege" tied to FoM, the UK called the EU's bluff, left, and UK is now back in Horizon anyway.

Perhaps with the fact that immigration hasn't stopped, the economy is a much bigger trash fire than any of EUs and the fact that people still don't seem to be happy and keep pushing even worse laws.

If you're truly convinced there's nefarious reasons for including megacap IPOs in passive index, you can always short the stock (or use derivatives) by the same amount.

I'm not sure you'll come out ahead. (Personally I don't get the outcry, except for nasdaq which has fairly stupid rules, delaying the inclusion of megacaps won't make the problem go away, but probably increase since the float will be massively larger). It's inherent to being a passive index.


The float will get bigger as you wait tho, since it's common for early investors to be locked for e.g. 6 months. You can argue it's better to smooth the entry as float gets unlocked rather than being front run by all the hedge funds in a single day on a massive capitalization.

The lockup periods are also being fiddled with: https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/stocks/articles/spacex-ipo...

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: