Forgeties79

I do actually think that we shouldn’t have laws we aren’t willing to enforce, so we agree more than you think. I’ve been against states unilaterally legalizing it for years because I worried what happens when states buck laws that I do agree with, such as voting rights or basic protections for all people.

The issue is we don’t run our country that way. We do apply it on a spectrum. So as long as that’s the status quo, I will expect them to back off on things that don’t need strict enforcement. You don’t need to eject every single undocumented person with impunity. It is not productive or ethical.

It’s also the federal government’s job to go around arresting everybody carrying or smoking weed, as it is still illegal no matter what any state says and every single person consuming it is a lawbreaker.

Should they go around and do that too?

Isn’t it so cool that none of the theoretical /s

Well that was sort of the case. You had different years of each model to consider as well, which isn’t all that different from the M/Max/Pro thing we’re discussing here. They didn’t refresh all products the same year.

I have already explained that and it’s not the same as native support any more than display link means one can claim M1’s run 2 external monitors (Mac mini excluded). I wrote this multiple comments ago:

> It simply doesn’t work anymore without 3rd party solutions.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50266629

You know what I am saying. This is a dumb argument and I’m moving on.

You cannot grab an iMac, plug it into a silicon Mac, and get a picture on the iMac (without 3rd party software). This is incorrect. Please go look this up. The feature stopped working when silicon Mac’s came out. It only works on Intel Macs. 5K iMac or not.

Target display mode, the feature that allowed this, is no longer supported.

Yes the previous iMacs sent a signal. Their current computers don’t receive the signal. This is not about the 5K display, you’re missing the core problem. It stopped working when the silicon line came out. You can’t get any iMac to work in target display mode on silicon Macs.

That’s not a technical limitation, that’s laziness. Go read more about this. It simply doesn’t work anymore without 3rd party solutions.

There are countless non-5k iMacs. I never said it had to be that. I had a beautiful 27” 2.5k display from 2011 I could’ve put to work.

There is no excuse other than laziness IMO. They likely decided not enough people use it and that they didn’t need to keep an excellent feature (total speculation to be fair). I can use iMovie to directly control/run playback from a dvcam from 2002 via like 4 daisy chained cables - including FireWire 400 - but they can’t connect an iMac anymore over thunderbolt 4 after supporting that for over a decade? Nah. Maybe there is a legitimate reason but I am incredibly skeptical.

I’m still angry that they deprecated target display mode. For a company that talks so much about recycling it’s really messed up they don’t support it. Such an amazing way to give life to old but incredible monitors - you’d have to spend $1000+ to get anything remotely resembling the quality of that display. You can’t even use ones that previously supported it on current Mac’s.

Unless I read it wrong, it sounds like this guy did not get it paid for by his employer - he runs multiple companies and is an angel investor with clearly deep pockets - and I have people talking about it being an investment in their careers. He could be using it support his businesses, yes, but that needs to be clarified and is still not a situation most people find themselves in.

This is not a straightforward business expense conversation IMO. Otherwise yes I do agree with you. A company should invest in supporting local models for their team.

I’m not spending $25k to “stay in the job market.” I come from film production, I’m no stranger to owning my own hardware. But that’s ridiculous. And at least people rented my gear.

“Gotta do deads, kids”

Yes 30-40 years ago when home computers were still a pretty new technology you paid a lot of money just to have them.

I can’t “invest” $25k into an LLM. The vast majority of people can’t. And I’m not spending $5k to timeshare it with 4 other people or whatever lol I currently make do with a 9070 + 32gb of ram.

If 10 people are sharing it the speed advantages suddenly drop drastically. That’s $2500 a head. 5 would be $5k. Then all the rules and such you need in place

This is all this stuff that dries people to pay for frontier models. Even running modest models requires a few thousand, unless you just want really lean ones. People don’t need frontier but it’s not cheap to effectively run, say, a 16gb Qwen 3.6 or 3.8 in the 30b range. Ram is like $15/gb and GPU’s with 16gb vram are hardly cheap.

EA

I think both of y’all glossed over the $25k of it all pretty quickly. This isn’t remotely an option for anyone.

He’s not missing the point IMO. He’s giving a way - a little convoluted but it almost works - to honor the spirit of the law.

My only major critique of it is the library doesn’t know you wanted to borrow then, and usage metrics are very important for them when it comes to deciding what to purchase. But I get what he’s suggesting, it makes sense even if it’s imperfect (I personally wouldn’t do it).

I like to do something this with little free libraries. One of the libraries in my city has a volunteer group that does a book sale every week, frequently has a ton of really good comic books and such. I’ll buy them for pretty cheap, enjoy whatever I find, and then put them in little free libraries. They always get picked up quickly, especially comics!

If you do not make it clear that you are paid by the company that you are writing an opinion about, the truth is borderline immaterial. I automatically do not trust you because you are deliberately obscuring this fact. If it doesn’t influence your opinion, then you shouldn’t have any problem admitting that you are getting paid. This is standard disclosure stuff, a very reasonable expectation.

Ok but it seems this was in fact deemed illegal so this whole discussion isn’t even relevant IMO

It’s the nypost. They don’t have journalists.

Anyway if you read the original guardian piece it does seem this was deemed illegal. The related government department halted their work saying it was not permitted. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2026/...

> Earlier this month, Google was ordered by the Finnish Licensing and Supervision Authority (LVV) to temporarily stop work on Muhos and another site about 100km south-east in the village of Otanmäki after it failed to complete the necessary environmental impact assessments before clearcutting the land

I did and I think you’re just coming across as very eager to defend LLM’s. Totally possible I am misreading your intention though

Does this even remotely matter? What’s the issue here?

Got some old gtechs I used for production work years ago, lots of 2-4TB that worked for 6-12mo then were moved to a closet and powered off for the last 8-10 years. Thinking of shucking them and checking them. Can’t imagine they’re bad yet.

You have no idea what I’m doing with my drives. Suffice to say no, I can’t delete 99% of what’s on them.

Those people are already not paying for sports. That is a massive market, worth bikkuons and billions annually. People are not going to simply stop watching professional sports. Especially because historically that has always been very expensive

Seriously I can’t even get my refurb enterprise drives for reasonable prices anymore. Used to pay like $150 for 14TB ultrastars now it’s like $300 for 12TB exos

> The moment a company goes public they're legally required to make stupid, short-term decisions that are worse for everyone, even the shareholders

The problem is a lot of companies functionally behave that way but there actually isn’t a mandate resembling anything like this, though it’s repeated so often I’m not surprised a lot of people it’s the case. Fiduciary duty doesn’t translate to “rip up and sell everything that isn’t nailed down, burn all your goodwill, and squeeze the shit out of everyone so you can extract every red cent as fast as humanly possible.” You are allowed to plan for the long-term. We just don’t and we create all sorts of incentives (bonus structures for instance) to chase short-term gains.

The investors aren’t going to rise up in all their fury and haul off a CEO to be guillotined because he invested in a project that spans more than a quarter. But unfortunately, plenty of businesses love operating as if that’s the case, because it gives an excuse to make quick dirty money. So they hide behind this erroneous perception of what constitutes “fiduciary duty.“ In the US’s particular form of capitalism it makes a lot of sense, even if it’s terrible for us as a whole.

But the solid ai generated code is still theoretical. Currently they’re being trained on human code and AI generated code with issues.

If there’s one thing we’ve learned about LLMs so far it’s that they don’t just invent new or better solutions generally. Nearly everything they do is a facsimile or is otherwise derivative. It’s rarely more than the sum of its parts and often it’s lesser than if we did it ourselves, it’s just fast and cheap. So this idea that AI is going to suddenly magically improve its own code and just get better… I don’t know, I’m not convinced we’ve seen anything like that yet and we’re just speculating it will happen because “it should,” which just feels akin to the crazy promises these companies have been making for years that are clearly not happening.