Check out their YouTube channel where they show plenty of interesting features. But just to list some I can think of:
- optional reactivity (i.e. you create chain of cells where editing 5th cells in the past causes update down the stream, pretty neat when working with dataframes). Its reactivity is a very cool feature once used to but you might not want it for something like running heavy ML training task so it can be toggled off
- you can switch notebook to multi-column notebook mode
- notebook is a web app that has sidebar with a lot of menus, there cool sections like Docs, Packages (you can download new packages right away there with uv), plenty of LLM integration with their custom prompts where you can reference dataframes so that it would be able to understand schema, some SQL and other DB integrations as well, cells can even contain SQL instead python code and output query result into python variable
- thanks to reactivity it got a lot of interactive elements like sliders buttons text fields or ability to create entire own widgets, there's even mode where all code blocks get hidden and you're left with complete app
- you can make web export of notebook that will translate python to WASM and publish it as fully working static page (though publishing something heavy complex like torch probably won't go well), this fits well with previous point as you can basically build simple interface hide all the code and publish it (like imagine matplotlib with couple of sliders)
- DataFrames (pandas/polars) displayed as interactive tables where you can filter by columns, scroll through pages of rows etc
- notebook stored in a .py format, unlike .ipynb with its json like structure. So code is very Git-friendly but you don't store computation results anymore
The UK's tier 2 and the EU's blue card are strictly better than the US H-1B to green card mechanism and have been for over a decade. You face no 7% per country capping on naturalization. Has it worked out? These visas look like O-1 competitors more than anything, not H-1B.
The issue is EU salaries (and the subsequent income tax) simply aren't attractive for most Indian, Chinese, and Koreans engineers in the US - the primary beneficiaries of the H1B program.
The only way a European office can attract Asian American talent on a work visa is to offer a salary comparable to the US, just like what the London offices for Google, Citadel, and Bloomberg do.
Otherwise, they can demand EU level salaries in their home market.
For an Indian on an H1B and working for FAANG, the choice isn't Palo Alto versus Berlin, it's the Palo Alto versus Hyderabad, Bangalore, or Pune.
Basically, the H1B change is causing a reverse brain drain back to Asia now now becuase there is an incentive to fully offshore instead of keeping mixed teams in the US.
I know at least 4 partners at the Indian entities of American VC funds already releasing an open call for startups for any Indian American who wants to return to India after the announcement this weekend, or to pair them with their portfolio companies in India.
> These visas look like O-1 competitors more than anything, not H-1B.
Not really. An O-1 is annoying and difficult to process, and does target a different persona than a blue card.
Depends on the kind of candidate. The brain drain already kind of started reversing in the 2008-12 period during those layoffs, and Indian tech salaries caught up with Eastern Europe (and the US at the top end of the bracket) by the early 2020s.
A large portion of Indians who came to the US on an H1B over the last decade basically came to the US in order to use the American experience to paper over issues with their resumes (eg. Didn't major in CS, didn't attend an INI, worked at a WITCH) causing their careers to stagnate.
Being in the US still conveys bragging rights, but increasingly the older generations recognize that someone immigrating abroad will basically almost never meet their parents again aside for a couple weeks a year.
As such, the name of the game now is to work in the US for a couple years and then become a PM Director or Director of Engineering at a GCC in India.
Additionally, Indian founders in the US have started considering IPOing in Indian equity markets instead of the US because the tech IPO market is (edit: relatively) dead here in North America (especially if you cannot show $400M+ in revenue) but showing $50M-$100M can guarantee you a $500M-$2B IPOs like Pine Labs' listing a couple days ago. There are at least 25 Indian startups in the process of IPOing this year [0] and the trend is continuing [1].
So for entrepreneurial Indians, the US is slowly starting to lose it's shine.
And finally, as an Indian STEM academic in the US, you can get a $100K public-private startup grant if you move your lab to India, and INIs in India (the Indian equivalent of Double First Class universities in China) allow academic staff to work with private sector players without demanding convluted IP partnerships. Thus, a lot of American-educated Indian academics in India are also becoming angel and seed investors, and have helped guide startups into YCombinator or raising a round from an Accel.
From a European perspective, the best example would probably be the reverse brain drain Poland and Czechia saw in the 2016-19 period, Israel in the early 2000s, and China in the 2010s.
There were 165 IPOs in the U.S. public markets in the first half of 2025. This was 76% higher than the 94 IPOs in the first half of 2024 and is estimated to be 47% higher than the total number of IPOs in 2024 when annualized for the full year of 2025.
I said just for the tech industry, and the multipliers are extremely difficult if you cannot show $400M in revenue. I'd recommend looking at some of Jamin Ball's analysis.
And comparing with 2024 is not great, because activity is still well below what we saw before the interest rate hike [0]
The IPO window is starting to reopen, but it's still somewhat closed compared to the norm from a couple years ago, and Sailpoint's lackluster IPO has dampened the mood along with CoreWeave's lackluster performance as a public company due to constant misses.
A lot of companies are in the process of building IPO readiness, but ime there is still some amount of hesitancy, becuase no one wants to be the first one to roll the dice, but I think Netskope's performance so far might help assuage worries.
I’ve worked for big tech in the Silicon Valley, worked for big tech in NYC, worked for big tech in Berlin. Though I make way less money here in Germany, I’d never move back to the US.
The money makes up for being far away from family as well as homesickness.
Living in the EU means you are far away from family as well with the added negative that unless you're Vietnamese in CEE and Paris, Fujianese in Central Italy, or Mirpuri in Scandinavia, there isn't a large Asian community in most EU states.
If I want Sikkimese, Pahari, Marathi, Chettinad, Maithili, or some other ethnic group's cultural services, cuisine, and/or goods I can always find that represented in American tech hubs. On the other hand it's nonexistent in Europe.
I think you're of European heritage, so for you your cultural heritage's goods, services, and cuisine are well represented across Europe. That isn't true for Indians, Chinese (China is not a monoculture), and Koreans.
For Indian, Chinese, and Korean nationals on a work visa in the US, you can earn a European salary in the old country while being close to family. This is why Europe is not enticing, because immigration is hard and if the only incentive is to have a lower take home, then there's no reason to go to Europe.
I’m also living a 15h flight away from my country/culture/people and I never felt the need for money to make up for it. Sounds like you just value money?
Also Berlin, Paris, Amsterdam et all are large, diverse metropolises. Not sure where the idea comes from that you wouldn’t be able to find your tribe or your cuisine in these cities.
> Also Berlin, Paris, Amsterdam et all are large, diverse metropolises. Not sure where the idea comes from that you wouldn’t be able to find your tribe or your cuisine in these cities.
Because they do not. The only European country with a large Indian diaspora is the UK, and that disaspora is overwhelmingly just Gujarati and Punjabi. Same for overseas Chinese and the Korean diaspora as well.
What worked for you is good for you, but the culture shift for someone from much of Asia to the EU is severe compared to the US where Asian immigration has been the norm for over a century.
> Sounds like you just value money?
Why leave India or China to earn a €70k salary when you can demand the same in Hyderabad or Hangzhou? Why move from Palo Alto to Paris, when you can move back to Pune or Pudong and earn the exact same, while also not facing culture shock and being close to family.
Also, having to become fluent in a French or German or Dutch or some other European language that isn't English is a severe blocker in much of Asia - where English is prioritized.
> Because Europe offers clean safe cities and good WLB
So does Australia and New Zealand.
And you are much closer to family as a result and in a countries where Asians are well represented and with the added bonus that they are Anglophone countries so no need to learn German, French, or some other European language that isn't English.
Look, Germany is a good country, but it legitimately isn't enticing for the kind of Indian or Chinese national who came to the US on a work visa.
> If all you want is to be in a big Indian diaspora and make a lot of money then I guess California is a good fit for you. Glad you like it
That's what most diasporas want. Look at the statistics of where the Indian, Chinese, and Korean diaspora are clustered. Amongst western countries it's overwhelmingly North America, Australia, and the UK
> then I guess California is a good fit for you
It is. I've been here since I was 1 years old when my parents were part of the initial work visa expansion in the 90s which brought tens of thousands of us Indian, Chinese, and Korean Americans to the US.
If I were to leave, I'd probably go to Singapore because I can take advantage of Asian dealflow while remaining in an Anglophone country where we are overrepresented.
I think if someone forfeits stability for money then that's their choice. I personally think that's an extremely strange one to make, but I'm one of those people who left the US for more stability, safety, so maybe I'm biased.
I really don't know why are you are getting so worked up about this.
At a macro level, the majority of Asian diasporas in the Western world are in North America, Australia, the UK, and New Zealand.
All I'm saying is for the majority of Asians, mainland Europe just doesn't have the same pull factor that the Anglophone has because we have never had a significant population in Europe.
It's the same way a management consultant with roots in Turkiye or Morocco will be biased to work in Frankfurt instead of NY simply because there's a massive pre-existing community no matter where you go in Germany and they will be close to family in Turkiye.
Most Indians in Germany are primarily from Maharashtra or Punjab.
And those numbers are minuscule compared to the diaspora in the UK, let alone Australia, New Zealand, and Canada which are all much more friendly to Asians than Europe.
Are there details on what visas Hyundai needed they couldn't get? L-1A/B for sending experts or management would make sense but I'm not sure there's any real issue getting those, especially not in 2023 when the plant was started.
They keep referring to the workers as contractors, which is a bit ambiguous as it is used for both people doing construction work or people hired for outside technical expertise.
If they were here in the first case of the word, I would say they were definitely in violation. If here for the second case, perhaps not but if they did not get the "B-1 in place of H-1B visa (temporary project visa): Some professionals might be eligible for a B-1 visa for temporary projects in specific scenarios. This option can be viable when an H-1B visa, typically used for specialty occupations, might be challenging to obtain." they may have still been in violation.
That consumption figure is per acre of almonds. But your point is still valid. In total almonds or other crops like alfalfa consume millions of acre-feet of water a year in a dry state like California while a single data center only consumes ~500-1000.
Indeed, that is my mistake. I misread the denominator of the consumption figure. Luckily the orders of magnitude are so dissimilar that mere factors of 100x do not affect the calculation.
3-4 acre*foot per year per acre of almonds results in the data center consuming ~200 acres of almond. ~4500 pounds per hectare results in ~1800 pounds per acre. So, that would produce about 360,000 pounds of almonds or ~720,000 $ worth of almonds.
That is certainly vastly less economically productive per unit of water consumed compared to a 750,000,000 $ data center which probably has a expected payback period of 10-20 years or about 37,500,000-75,000,000 $ of produced value per year.
Because an AI model developed in the EU will, by design, be compliant with EU data and AI regulations from day one, which makes it a strong selling point for companies looking to launch AI-powered products on the EU market?
Yes, regulatory compliance is a significant concern for software product design in the EU these days. But that's a good thing - it stops a lot of hare-brained ideas and abusive business models at the drafting phase. Also, from my own observation, the rules seem annoying at first, because they tend to shut down the most exciting ideas - but after a while you notice that this is because those ideas come with bad failure modes and bad second-order effects, and regulations are forcing you to actually consider them.
But EU citizens want good AI models, not EU approved models, and people can use VPN. Because regulatory process kills fast moving business and whatever is rubber stamped by EU bureaucracts and compliance-industrial complex law firms sucking out money by selling snake oil compliance services is already few years behind.
Different markets are made of up different people, who (‘s leaders) may want different things…
The car market is a great example. The US market has decided it doesn’t want EVs from the biggest EV producer in the world (China), so people are indeed buying cars with older technology than what the new global standard has become thanks to China’s successfully state-sponsored EV market.
It may very well be that the US leads globally in AI, while some markets handicap access and development for internal reasons.
... despite collecting enough metrics to infer the shape and weight of your body. Also there's the risk of ads suddenly appearing at the discretion of the vendor.
I'm guessing that due to regulations, the only AIs you'll be allowed to use in the EU will be the EU developed ones that fulfill the requirements, so there's a captive market right there for local companies.
Granted, they'll probably end up performing worse than US or Chinese ones operating without restrictions and being uncompetitive on the global free market, but when did EU leaders ever think about long term consequences? Certainly not when they tied their economy to Russian gas and banned nuclear, certainly not when they prioritized toxic diesel engines over gasoline, certainly not when they demilitarized or when they ceded tech innovation to US and China, but for once this will be the right call, I can feel it, this will bring EU to the forefront of tech supremacy.
Globalization is most definitely not over because human capitalistic greed is not over, and since EU is poor in resources and it and the US lack cheap manufacturing at scale of commodity goods, it's just evolved into moving dirty manufacturing from China to Vietnam, India etc. and importing the third world into the west for cheap labor instead of using it abroad.
Nor is the destruction of the planet as plenty of other countries than China will do it for western money/business opportunities. The planet is doomed either way due to factors out of your individual control, you can choose to profit out of it or die poor thinking you did the right scarified to save it when it actually did nothing and your sacrifice was in vain. The planet is not saved just because you gave up using plastic straws and switched to tethered bottle caps while China is building 9000 new coal plants, India dumps plastic waste in the ocean and BP/Chevron have the 200th oil spill.
Globalization may be over from a military strategical point of view, but not from a capitalistic, economical and environmental point of view. But you go and pay more "green" taxes to the state for everything you buy, I'm sure that will save the planet.
Trading resources that one lacks inside the kingdom borders isn't the same as the planet scale globalisation since the end of 20th century.
Trade has always existed between settlements through mankind's history, and war as well, when trade alone doesn't make it.
Then there are the trade partners one trusts, and the ones we thought we could trust, and like the wind changes direction, no longer.
Agree with the stupidity of plastic straws, if one people actually left the beach clean as they do at home, or maybe that is exactly what they do at home, leaving garbage all over the place.
We're not going back to self sufficient tribal societies. Stuff like semiconductors or iphones wouldn't exist if every country tried to be self sufficient and cut out from trade the countries they don't like.
You'll still be dependent on trading with comunist China and barbaric oil rich countries like Saudi Arabia who beheaded your Journalists, because they have stuff you need and can't get anywhere else, no matter how much you dislike them.
There's idealistic fantasy politic for the political speeches to the unwashed masses, and then there's Realpolitik on which the world actually runs where our leaders do backroom deals with the devil in order for the line to go up.
At least in Europe we don't pretend those states are something else, throwing out ridiculous tariffs for bringing impossible manufacturing processes back home.
Those banana and ananas fields in mainland US will be a great landscape.
A factor that goes into that decision is the now inherent unreliability of relying on entities in the US as a partner. For some situations it's safer to do it in the EU despite the regulations.
> The EU has zero tech companies that rival FAANG et al here in the US. Zero. Because of it's (well-intentioned but harmful) business regulations.
Not really, it's because the EU has 28 sets of business regulations, those of the 27 members states and of the EU itself. The single market is not yet all that single, especially when it comes to digital services. The now abandoned project of the ever closer union wasn't some idealistic bs, it was the plan to gradually fix this.
The fact of the matter is that of the voters who care about AI, the most vocal ones vehemently oppose it. Sabotaging AI development is a feature, not a bug. This regulation might well be an attempt at appeasing the faction that wants to ban LLMs in the EU entirely.
Not just AI models. The EU only leads in regulations and nothing else and it shows: since 2008 both China and the US have experienced insane GDP growth while the EU has been totally stagnant (inflation adjusted).
I don't think people realize at which speed the EU is falling into oblivion. It's really horrible to witness from inside the EU. Cities are poorer and poorer, high-trust societies are becoming low-trust ones due to rising (imported) poverty and crimes. Cities that used to be beautiful cities now see weekly kidnapping (Paris) and AK47s are fired in Brussels on a weekly basis.
But we should all applaud because AI is going to be regulated and because we're going to be green. Go EU, yay!
Meanwhile people in the EU don't even want to have kids anymore: I honestly have got a hard time figuring out why young people in the EU would even want kids seen the overall atmosphere reigning here now.
So while India, Brazil, China, the US, and many other countries are still going to see growth, I fully expect the EU to keep shooting itself in the foot (like it did with its car industry, destroying it with regulations and handing over the EU EV car market to China).
Those who can do do, losers who cannot do regulate.
A half baked programming language that isn't deterministic or reproducible or guaranteed to do what you want. Worst of all worlds unless your input and output domains are tolerant to that, which most aren't. But if they are, then it's great
Interoperability is, and always was, the hardest part of programming systems together. It's telling that the ai tooling needed sustained non ai effort to expose the interfaces via MCP (or ws-* or rest or an enterprise service bus or xml or CORBA or EJB or...)
I wish I wasn't medically barred from having a pilot's license. Not for the pay, but I just like the idea of flying. Unfortunately, I cannot. I recommend people use their salaries to learn how to fly regardless! It's maybe ~$15-20k to get a PPL which is doable for the tech crowd with some planning.
Doing the work to effectively prepare those docs for an LLM probably does involve "learning the library", but once one person has done that (and published the results) many other people can benefit from it.
I'm a library author myself, so publishing LLM-enhanced versions of the docs to help other people use my library more effectively feels like a sensible use of my time.
