You don't seem to understand the concept of "scale". That hasn't even begun yet. Generative AI use has just started. We're looking at version 0.1 at this point. The first curve hasn't even been reached yet.

And that most semiconductor companies are fabless is what will drag them back. That doesn't go for only NVidia. It's very far from meaningless when the competition starts.

Altavista was the top dog in their market, because nothing else came close to competing with them. But they couldn't scale.

Neither can NVidia. They don't even make chips.

Sure, they're leading now. Like Altavista did. And they'll have huge problems sticking to that lead.

They're not the only game in town. Several other companies are moving into AI chips. Some with very deep pockets, and some with extensive experience in such development.

NVidia don't even make their own chips. They're going to have serious trouble maintaining margin and market share when things start moving. They're currently the Altavista of search engines.

I can sue you for this comment. The US is very kind to people wanting to litigate. That has zero bearing on what the law actually says, which is what we're discussing here.

On my side of the Atlantic, such tools are not illegal. In Washington they fall under US Federal legislation, which does make access circumvention tools illegal - however, it has not been fully tested in court whether accessing a game one has bought actually falls under this provision as it's not very well defined. In the famous case of DVDs it was ruled that it's not allowed, but in other cases it has been ruled to be allowed.

This could well fall under the exception of reverse engineering, meaning it's not a slam dunk for Nintendo either.

The DMCA is a very, very broken law. But it doesn't hand Nintendo the emulator creators on a plate. And I have a suspicion there will be a lot of support stepping up for the defendant in this case as well.

That Nintendo argues something does not make it so. So far both law and legal precedence protects accessing something that you have bought and own.

Licenses can not retract legal right to use what you have purchased in a manner you see fit. There is no legal precedent allowing a license to trump merchantability. If I have bought the right to use something, I have the right to use it.

This all hingers on Nintendo in practice stating they have licensed you the hardware and the cartridge, and nothing like that has ever held up in court, nor is it protected by legal text (beyond abuse of the DMCA).

Completely wrong. You can not only write your own game, but run homebrews that others have created. That's a growing area for both PSP, PS Vita and Switch consoles with cfw, and for their emulators.

Some of those homebrews are applications, some are games, but they are all perfectly legal to use on Yuzu.

In addition, dumping your own owned games and keys from your own owned console and cartridges, in order to run them with modifications, is perfectly legal. That is also a growing area for modded consoles and for emulators. Lots of beloved old games get bugs fixed and options added this way, in a way which is legal but requires an emulator.

Making comments about how these tools can only be used for piracy is typical from people who have no interest in the communities around these tools, and who comment from a position of blatant ignorance of what is going on in homebrew and modded gaming today.

Definitely factually false. You can not only write your own game, but run homebrews that others have created. That's a growing area for both PSP, PS Vita and Switch consoles with cfw, and for their emulators.

Some of those homebrews are applications, some are games, but they are all perfectly legal to use on Yuzu.

In addition, dumping your own owned games and keys from your own owned console and cartridges, in order to run them with modifications, is perfectly legal. That is also a growing area for modded consoles and for emulators. Lots of beloved old games get bugs fixed and options added this way, in a way which is legal but requires an emulator.

Making comments about how these tools can only be used for piracy is typical from people who have no interest in the communities around these tools, and who comment from a position of blatant ignorance of what is going on in homebrew and modded gaming today.

So you're an apologist who claims to be an atheist, and comments with misleading information, outright propaganda and gaslightning. Got it.

As to humanism, I'm very interested in your definition of it, since you claim that things in outright opposition to humanism as it's generally understood are things you claim come FROM humanism - when they were invented by and espoused by people who did not claim to adhere to humanism nor are seen by anyone as humanists.

But I doubt you'll stoop to explaining your apologism, to be honest. You don't come across as the type who actually knows the first thing about what you write.

So you're saying your cherry picked bit is "the central message of scriptures", because it happens to agree with the image you want to convey of a bronze age, sexist, slave keeping religion, and you're on top of that trying to gaslight that by saying "oh, it's not your fault you read the whole bible without getting that I hold only this little bit to matter".

Yeah, no. The case you're making here is that you're unable to evaluate the source of your religion without strong bias (big surprise there), and that you're unfit to explain it to others.

And no. Humanism was not the origin of eugenics. That's based on an industrialist/capitalist view on society, and goes straight against humanist ideals.

That you speak about "our elites" is telling. You've got a set narrative which you're trying to justify.

And no, I do not personally hold to your strawman. And I don't for a second believe you're an atheist, with this level of apologism and venomous attacks on atheism and humanism flowing from you.

The only valuable thing here is my time, which I am reclaiming by not caring about your utter nonsense.

Except that's not the story of the bible. That's cherry picked. The bible states that as long as you have God on your side, taking slaves is fine. As long as you're God's chosen, keeping slaves is just dandy. If you're one of the lambs, the world belongs to you, and God's will be done - God's will, which happens to coincide with what you want to do.

Treating everyone equally has been done in many societies through history. Notably, some of the worst at not doing that have been christian societies. There's not even a need to go to the Children's Crusade to find one of the worst examples, just look at the christian nation of the US firebombing its own citizens to keep them in line.

Luckily the western world is turning away from the atrocities of christianity and instead embracing humanism, which actually does hold that everyone is equal to everyone else, and not to an imagined supreme being that we should all pretend allegiance to while following tenets our authority figure presents us with. This has led to a vast decrease in suffering in the world, and much better life in those countries which turn their face away from authority over reality and instead embrace that we are all equal.

Christianity does not teach "the universalisation of morality". Throughout the vast majority of their history, and into today, christians held and hold slaves. The religion specifically allows for slavery and for treating people differently based on their ethnicity.

This is something which secularists and humanists have managed to alter, and yes, many of them are atheists.

You're arguing completely backwards. The changes you're trying to ascribe to a bronze age mythology which holds women inferior and that slavery is perfectly fine actually come from a turning away from antiquated christian ideals and going back to ideals which you call "pagan".

Rather the opposite. Those "pagan predecessors" had a moral system which christianity simply adopted. What the religion added was worse things, like subjugating women and forbidding teaching of what they consider heresy.

There are definitely hinges. No latch, no, that is removed when turning the emergency door into a plug. That's the ONLY CHANGE done to the actual door. Everything else remains the same.

And then there are non load bearing bolts added to ensure it doesn't slide open, because the latch is removed.

Yes, lots has been written, most of it completely clueless, like this comment by you.

It is a perfectly normal aircraft door, for use in emergencies only. The ONLY THING that is altered when turning it into a plug is removing the handle and placing non load bearing bolts which keep it from sliding open.

You're saying the exact same thing I am, but for some reason you're all worked up about it. No idea why.

If you remove the bolts, it opens like it would when used as an emergency door. No difference. The hinges are still in place. Only the handle is removed.

There are no other hinges than the bottom hinges.