Crazy, right? Doing a good thing that's a net positive for humankind is being punished by the market.. it's almost like markets don't foster beneficial long-term outcomes and we need other entities to enforce those.
620 karma · joined November 4, 2022
At least when applied to Government in the form of "Representative Democracies" I think this overly simplistic view is not useful to analyze what's happening in the real world.
The assumption behind electing representatives is precisely that they will advocate and advance agendas on behalf of the majority - no matter their social status. However, for this to work it requires a populace that is sufficiently informed, educated, and intelligent to understand what sensible solutions look like.
Unfortunately, Rousseau, Voltaire, Kant and many others were wrong and even after 300 years of putting young homo sapiens through 10 years of public education and teaching them rational thinking this assumption turns out to be false.
*) and conveniently for YT that out-of-band monetization channel - which they don't profit from - is the exact thing that's negatively affected by an overall drop in view counts
Same thing will most likely happen here too, it's just a matter of time / number of users.
> If I call a plumber, and the guy who shows up doesn’t know anything except how to ask ChatGPT what to do, I will feel this person has misrepresented themselves.
This is essentially saying process matters (just as much or even more) than results. And I would say long term that is probably true, but in the short term it is often not the case. If I have a leak in my house I care not what the guy's title is. If they can fix it now, I'm happy. With a doctor I'd actually argue it is similar for emergency situations (which is why EMS are often not doctors), but in a long-term care situation it obviously becomes much more relevant. In essence, this just expresses a preference for that part of the market where interactions are less transactional and more about building lasting business relationships.
> I care because, frankly, those of us who do web development have worked damn hard to earn the proficiency we have, and we, like all other skilled laborers, deserve a measure of respect for our work.
Which is really no argument at all, because everybody deserves respect. Treating people differently because of titles is so backwards.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_the_United_Ki...
> Trump did not say whether he is positioning conventional or nuclear strike-capable submarines
Yeah I guess the point being that by playing those (previously "unknown") deployments as an open hand now you demonstrate strength. My understanding is that there are always a number of mid/long range defensive deployments in the Mediterranean as part of NATO contracts with Spain/Portugal (through AEGIS ballistic air defense systems on destroyers), but no (sea-based) long-range nuclear deployments. So explicitly deploying attack capabilities into a "suitable region" does represent an escalation. Though I'd say it's still pretty much on the (rather) low end of the spectrum of escalatory responses.
> For comparison, you can buy a DGX B200 with 8x B200 Blackwell chips and 1.4TB of memory for around $500k. Two systems would give you 2.8TB memory which is enough for this.
That would be enough to support a single user. If you want to host a service that provides this to 10k users in parallel your cost per user scales linearly with the GPU costs you posted. But we don't know how many users a comparable wafer-scale deployment can scale to (aside from the fact that the costs you posted for that are disputed by users down the thread as well), so your comparison is kind of meaningless in that way, you're missing data.