in many flats even recently built you don’t get three-phase power, just single phase, but building divides single three-phase supply into three groups of single phase circuits like you say (do you really need 20kW in residential flat? one that doesn’t use EV charger, built in 90s-10s?) i guess it depends on country also. separate houses tend to get three phase connection where i live

floating neutral will also be a problem in american-type two-phase installation, might be even worse (more frequent) on account of large number of lightly maintained transformers used (why on gods green earth there’s few-kV medium voltage line going down every street, americans make it make sense)

Today many of switching mode power supplies accept anywhere between 100-250V

bases of pins are insulated, like in type C/E/F

you don’t have to have three phase circuit to be affected by floating neutral in three-phase substation upstream. in some places in us there are 208v interphase three-phase circuits, which give 120v phase to neutral, which is distributed as a pair of wires as single-phase circuit. this is also normal way to deliver single-phase power in europe, as it’s most efficient use of conductor. (from 400v three-phase circuits) in case more power is needed than single-phase circuit can deliver, three-phase circuit is installed

if there’s switch on device, it’s 2p1t meaning both phase and neutral are switched. if it’s permanent, non-pluggable circuit, like lightning, it’s okay if only phase is switched (neutral is connected permanently)

it’s a bad practice to design appliance in such a way to assume that neutral will have low voltage, because in case of neutral failure in three-phase circuit you can get full voltage there, and there can be a couple of volts difference (sometimes more) between neutral and ground even in normal circumstances

it’s better to cut off both live and neutral at the same time anyway, especially if there’s no standard which is which. also, as device designer you don’t know if it’ll be used on a circuit that has neutral and phase where you think it’ll go or not. (ie british appliance used on unpolarized circuit, like type F. adapters exist)

Type E/F carries 16A/230V, and nowadays there are shutters included which only allow two pins to be inserted at once, not one but not the other. There’s no standard as of which pin should be L1 and neutral anyway, nor it should matter, and fuses in british plugs are to accommodate ring circuits, which were introduced as a result of copper shortages (ie decades of tech debt)

Or you could just use thicker wires like everyone else, or drop the use of ring mains, which is the actual reason why fuses in plugs were introduced. The reason why this was done was post-WW2 copper shortage. In other countries you’ll see more likely star type circuit

I think that type A plug would be greatly improved in terms of safety and mechanically if it was put in a grounded metal shroud, in style of DIN connector https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIN_connector it still would be compact, smaller than type F

UK uses type G. Type E/F plug has both contact for grounding pin like in type E and two sliding ground contacts on side like in type F. Sockets are either E or F, and i’ve mostly seen E

no, because it’ll just trip fuse, and stoves are wired directly anyway

C/E/F also have shutters, probably more types do that too

Type E and F plugs are not really a thing anymore, today it’s more common to find combined Type E/F plugs.

Fuses in british plugs are a mistake and only a requirement because of sketchy practices allowed in british electrical code immediately after WW2. Nobody else does that because nowhere else electric code is built in such a way that it is necessary. Switch seems to be mildly useful tho

llms allowed them to glide all the way to the point of failure without learning anything

japanese have 100v and don’t have this problem

you shouldn’t mix alcohol and zopiclone mate you’re gonna die from this

maybe check from openai didn’t clear

80000 hours are the same cultists from lesswrong/EA that believe singularity any time now and they’re also the core of people trying to build their imagined machine god in openai and anthropic

it’s all very much expected. verbose nonsense is their speciality and they did that way before time when chatbots were a thing

bro tried to recruit jihadists in roblox (failed) and now screenshots from this all are a matter of public record 💀

i think you’ve got it backwards. the very same people (and their money) who were deep into crypto went on to new buzzword, which turns out to be AI now. this includes altman and zucc for starters, but there’s more

it’s maybe because chatbots incorporate, accidentally or not, elements of what makes gambling addiction work on humans https://pivot-to-ai.com/2025/06/05/generative-ai-runs-on-gambling-addiction-just-one-more-prompt-bro/

the gist:

There’s a book on this — Hooked: How to Build Habit-Forming Products by Nir Eyal, from 2014. This is the how-to on getting people addicted to your mobile app. [Amazon UK, Amazon US]

Here’s Eyal’s “Hook Model”:

First, the trigger is what gets you in. e.g., you see a chatbot prompt and it suggests you type in a question. Second is the action — e.g., you do ask the bot a question. Third is the reward — and it’s got to be a variable reward. Sometimes the chatbot comes up with a mediocre answer — but sometimes you love the answer! Eyal says: “Feedback loops are all around us, but predictable ones don’t create desire.” Intermittent rewards are the key tool to create an addiction. Fourth is the investment — the user puts time, effort, or money into the process to get a better result next time. Skin in the game gives the user a sunk cost they’ve put in. Then the user loops back to the beginning. The user will be more likely to follow an external trigger — or they’ll come to your site themselves looking for the dopamine rush from that variable reward.

Eyal said he wrote Hooked to promote healthy habits, not addiction — but from the outside, you’ll be hard pressed to tell the difference. Because the model is, literally, how to design a poker machine. Keep the lab rats pulling the lever.

chatbots users also are attracted to their terminally sycophantic and agreeable responses, and also some users form parasocial relationships with motherfucking spicy autocomplete, and also chatbots were marketed to management types as a kind of futuristic status symbol that if you don’t use it you’ll fall behind and then you’ll all see. people get mixed gambling addiction/fomo/parasocial relationship/being dupes of multibillion dollar advertising scheme and that’s why they get so unserious about their chatbot use

and also separately core of openai and anthropic and probably some other companies are made from cultists that want to make machine god, but it’s entirely different rabbit hole

like with any other bubble, money for it won’t last forever. most recently disney sued midjourney for copyright infringement, and if they set legal precedent, they might take wipe out all of these drivel making machines for good