chii

But the GPU vendors won't really have an incentive to do this - artificially restricting their customer base? Unless they and the hyperscalers all collude to cartel the market of course!

This is why it's so important to have more than one hardware vendor. The bigger the ecosystem, the harder it is to cartel. I cant believe it, but i am pinning my hopes on china to break through with commoditized chips and hardware.

> What is the reason?

more tax revenue from any source they can imagine. Instead of trying to cut out the welfare, and reign in spending, it's always easier to propose a tax that's small and widespread (so that each individual may not be incentivized to fight it).

if `i` ever gets modified inside the loop, and skips 0 (e.g., got decremented twice when it is at 1), then you might end up with an infinite loop?

Usually, this won't happen of course, but because `i` is not declared inside a for-loop, it must have been declared outside, and thus might even look like a regular variable that could be used by some "clever" coding to multipurpose it!

In any case, it's a niche worry i have, so i usually don't do it if i know there's a for loop that would do.

your agreement to the terms when downloading the weights is the enforcement - if you grow too big, you become a target from which money can be extracted if you violated the terms.

yea, i think the low efficiency (plus how to predict where lightning would hit!). Might as well just put up a wind turbine, since wind is much more predictable, not to mention easier to harvest.

any % is indefensible, because this should be user toggled. It's an unnecessary money burner.

The people complaining about the international students don't care about the population replacement rate - they only care about their own individual circumstance at this point in time, not some 50-80 years in the future (where the 1.4 replace rate starts being a problem).

> at night to burning fossil fuels only at night

only natural gas plants can do this. a coal plant cannot spin up just for the night and turn back off when the sun comes up - it's incredibly inefficient and probably causes more premature wear/tear too.

Framework would have higher fixed cost compared to the incumbent manufacturers, if their number of customers are smaller. Therefore, to even get the same fixed margin, they'd have to charge a higher price (not to mention the same margin is unlikely to sustain them unlike the other manufacturers).

But with the current increase in prices of hardware, i expect people to start thinking about repairability and upgradeability, which would increase the total size of potential customer base.

Firearm companies sell objects that create harm all the time, even if they have protective uses.

Why is AI singled out as being harmful?

> I’d probably pay a ~40% premium for FW

and you'd be one of the higher ones.

But a 40% premium is not enough to sustain framework imho. The business model of framework is that you don't buy a new laptop, but just upgrade. Therefore, the lifetime value of one customer on framework is less than that of an Asus buyer (who would have to buy a new laptop every new CPU generation or when batteries die, which is probably at most 5 years).

Therefore, framework has to charge a lot more per customer to make the business make sense. 2x premium is not unreasonable under this sort of assumption.

I personally do think they're doing a good job of course, but i do also wonder the long term viability because their customers are so niche.

People are and should be allowed to make bad financial choices, provided that they take on all of the consequences from it themselves, and not expect to be bailed out.

Framework does exactly what the GP claims to want.

Unfortunately, not many people making those claims _actually_ want them by revealed preferences. They overwhelmingly want the lower price laptops with similar performance specs.

> far easier to run your own business than at any time in history.

But let me play the devil's advocate and argue the point: who will the business sell to, if most people are not in a position with wealth to spare to buy from your business?

> Nobody says what these "new skills" are?

it's unknown, because those skills and work associated with them are not yet created.

Just like how being a live streamer (or youtuber) is not a known skill until the advent of streaming platforms and their associated economies. If you asked on the internet in 1995 what kids would have done for a job in 2025, none of them would've said streamer.

i recall always playing with a house rule where you can pay some large amount to immediately build hotels, but cant recall if this made the game more or less "problematic".

The name can imply a lot and make bias.

Responsible disclosure puts the responsibility onto the researcher - it implies they're irresponsible if they didn't comply with the company's timeframe.

Coordinated disclosure accurately describes what _should_ happen - the disclosure happens after some X time (where X is a reasonable time that depends on the vulnerability, as determined by the researcher).

> You're forced to write syntax that appeases the tester. If they are not happy you need to return and rewrite.

that's called the write/compile/check loop

but if suddenly it's ai, people freakout at having to do this?

i dont mean technically, i meant players won't accept it.

> My counterargument is that America is too big, and needs to end its massive Federation (which seems to cause so many of the problems here), to allow more-local-rule.

and yet, when it comes to local zoning, where NIMBY rules, there's a large voice to call for federal overruling to make dense zoning possible despite local resident's wishes.

The idea of more local rule is only good when it suits said locals, and not good when it doesn't - it's all self-serving imho.

> How do you build reputation in that environment?

word of mouth and circle of trust that spread?

You can't be interrupted with ads every few minutes when gaming.

they dont need to brick the machine - they can simply ban your online account, which they can use EULA to make you agree to before getting that account. You lose your games if the game requires online verification (which implies an account). This way, you won't be able to play your games purchased, even if it's a physical copy - you can only play games that don't have verification like this (i dont own a switch, so i dont know if this is actually true).

None of these would be consideration if the car itself was competitive. Fortunately (or unfortunately, depending on which side you're on), tesla is now no longer competitive with the advent of the chinese EV manufacturers.

The last holdout being the USA, where the gov't is preferentially giving tesla their marketshare instead of letting open competition work in favour of consumers.

But like japanese cars, this will eventually also take root.

> you would be able to claim that as a work expense against your income

only if it was necessary for the job, and the employer would've otherwise paid for it.

But if the employer originally paid for an LLM, but chose not to now, i am not sure that you personally paying for one is tax deductible (might have to argue it out with the tax office).

people pay out of pocket for transport to job all the time. granted, $1k/month is quite high, and personally i would say that it ought to be an employer responsibility to provide the tooling (and bear all the costs). But it is understandable, if not foolhardy imho.

> backed by the Chinese state

as opposed to the current crop being backed by the US state? The ones that are basically crying foul at competition? The ones that unilaterally tries to dictate based on political friendliness and compliance (ala, anthropic getting banned)?

At least with open models, you can own the hardware and do the end to end. The current bottleneck is hardware availability at low cost, but i am guessing the chinese state is looking to build their own chip supply chains. I suspect they will succeed.

so how does being a good shooter make you a better guided missile shooter?

but the analogy would be a riflemen trained to aim, and a person pressing button for guided missiles. How good you are at the original task is unlikely to matter when the new way supersedes the old way.

> coach someone else to run faster

my point was that the new future where running faster doesn't matter any more might come, because everyone is driving (and potentially can't run much at all).