bitmasher9

They are literally solving the same problem, it’s just that distro packages operate on a lower level and thus receive more scrutiny. There have been plenty of examples of poisoned Linux packages, both at the source level and at the package level.

Self study can only go so far, and often when someone self studies there are obvious gaps in their education compared to someone that entered a formal program.

Studying in a university has the advantage of learning from experts and being surrounded by people that are also learning from experts. This has significant advantages.

> I would argue that a child has a right to a certain number of years of education.

I would also argue society is better if its people are more educated.

How is this any different than the browser wars? We use to have a diverse market full of choices, and now we have Chromium (almost all market share) and Firefox/Safari on the edges.

I wonder how hard they would press an estate. It’s bad PR to go after widows and surviving children, and the data has already escaped.

This is something they’d want to settle quietly, so the family would have leverage.

Additionally self driving vehicles are promising to reduce the total number of collisions, and collision associated repair is a significant portion of all auto mechanic activity.

Yeah, someone is at risk of trafficking the gps data out of Virginia initially.

The car companies need to stay in their lanes on this one. You’re risking selling a >$40k piece of hardware that requires professional service every six months in order to sell me $240/yr in software subscriptions.

In a proper capitalist society the government defines the rules of the market, aligned with the interests of several parties, and then companies compete within that well regulated and fair environment. The only incentive the government should have is to grow the entire market, so that they can collect more tax. There might be minor exceptions to protect key industries like food production or defense, but these should be a small as possible to ensure healthy competition.

It’s something entirely different when the government starts taking a stake in individual companies instead of the market as a whole. This can easily bias the government to pick OpenAI for certain contracts, or enact laws that benefit OpenAI more than its competitors. It reduces competition which hurts the overall economy, and it is an obvious vector for corruption which hurts the efficiency of the government.

It’s great if we can leverage AI to design the next great government system. A 5% stake feels more like a bribe to help push through some of these datacenter projects and enact friendly laws.

Except Sony is notoriously bad at actually securing their consoles.

512GB unified memory is targeting local inference of large models, or local training of non-frontier models.

This is the most uncharitable outlook on the increase of PRs. It may be true for some contributors, but any company reviewing their GitHub will see that the code is largely spam.

I think most AI generated code is people that want to help the project, but maybe aren’t familiar with the standards and norms.

I was a bit confused by the term “disk” until I realized you’re talking about NVMe.

A relic from “Hard Disk Drive”, which was about two persistent storage technologies ago.

It’s always fantastic to read a success story of migrating to Linux gaming from Windows. As Windows gets worse and worse there will be more people joining us.

Even without buying you can send Linux gaming signals by playing on Linux and participating in the hardware survey.

Net neutrality was about processing network traffic differently based on who was sending the packets.

It’s not entirely dissimilar.

Here’s a recent gallup poll.

You’re right that the AI opinions are largely colored by the business practices around it.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/694835/image-capitalism-slips.a...

Do you really think the truth has anything to do with the power of a narrative?

The empirical data doesn’t support this view.

Capitalism approval rates in the US is much more favorable than 16%.

For workstation inference a unified memory architecture would be a good cost/performance balance, while keeping COGs reasonable.

512GB unified memory macs are available, with the ram upgrade costing a few grand.

The reason why some Capital Interests want to blacklist DeepSeek in the US is so that you are forced to buy Claude/GPT/Gemini, which will feed revenue into an industry that requires revenue (or it’s a big problem).

The reason why some Capital Interests don’t want to ban DeepSeek is so companies that utilize AI have more options, and running your own DeepSeek cluster acts as an independent cost comparison for enterprise inference contracts.

The raising AI valuation is giving more weight to those that want to blacklist DeepSeek. The AI Safety narrative is strong. I see a path where any institution with enough compute might be watched in a similar was chem labs are observed by the DEA.

Nvidia will sell you an entire server rack ready for inference. Or maybe you can roll out your own Blackwell based system.

We’re approaching a world where running a primer frontier model is possible on a workstation, probably will have something under $30k that looks like a desktop for Nvidia’s next generation. It sounds expensive, until you look at your Anthropic bill.

It’s similar unit economics as could computing for the open models. You can save a ton on the expenses by buying the hardware, but it requires a lot of in-house expertise, and you get the most value if you keep the system operating around the clock. The big kink is open models are usually 2 quarters behind frontier, and your competitors are probably trying to get access to mythos.

It’s a big number. I wonder what steps we will see to raise revenue leading up to an IPO, and specifically if they’ll cut off the OpenAI subscription that is powering my Open claw install. They have been quite friendly with using the oauth tokens in various harnesses.

Why wouldn’t you use curl for the quick test?

What an interesting take. I was imagining how precious one last conversation with a loved one would be.

I think it’s funny to describe a drug as “street-quality” while using a slang term “heroic dose” in the same sentence.

I don’t like this publication, I think the actual scientific study is good information.

The information should be considered by regulators and scientists. They should read the scientific journals directly. I want to be able to trust in institutions to make informed decisions to improve environmental factors that require collective action.

I don’t think informing citizens about danger so they can demand policy reform is the actual purpose of The Guardian article. I’d love to be wrong on this, but that’s a fairy tale about how the system actually works.

It’s not actionable information though.

The language it uses to describe the story is clearly designed to make parents feel like the environment is unsafe.

Cherry picking scientific articles to cover that will cause fear is not just-the-facts reporting.

Doom-and-gloom, fear and anger are the predominant emotions in the entire journalism industry.

Very few places are doing any just-the-facts reporting.

I’ve seen automation scripts for this process of updating packages.

Makes sense that the most popular AUR packages will be candidates for the main repo.