Bluntly, they can't. That genie is already out of the box for anything already available; and even going forward - Unless China itself blocks export, there's no realistic way to stop us from using a non-Chinese non-US mirror to grab them.

Realistically, hardware is the sole limiting factor for open-weight models, so restricting H200's is probably the closest we can come to a meaningful embargo. There's no practical way for most of us to run a model like Kimi K3 with almost 600GB (at BF16) of weights. Even using CPU offloading and/or multi-GPU sharding (if those are even possible for K3, I haven't looked at it in depth yet), the performance drop would give a throughput best measured in minutes or even hours per token, not particularly useful.

What this will accomplish is exactly what the OP quoted - It won't be possible to run these legally, so virtually all commercial use would be DOA. Joe Hobbyist couldn't care less though.

Because what amounts to a simple financial breach of contract is being enforced unilaterally and extra-judicially - And by parties traditionally known for being some of the sleaziest and least ethical bastards on the planet at that.

In a situation where the burden of proof is on the lender and the disruption to the customer's life severe, we should absolutely not be allowing ScumCo Lending to pull that trigger absent a court order.

To be clear, I'm not claiming there's no precedent for this (and when we're talking about microwaves and TVs, hey, pay up deadbeats!). But phones are unique in that it's virtually impossible to function in the modern world without one. Personally, I might get two calls a week and missing those wouldn't disrupt me much; but I literally can't even log in at work without an MFA app tied to my phone.

I was actually wondering exactly the opposite - If this only works for three satellites per launch, would it be overall cheaper and easier to just launch three new satellites? Not to mention, the tech on a new satellite is likely far better than was available ten+ years ago.

Sure, it's one launch vs three, but moving between different orbits and physically latching on to another satellite is delicate work. I wouldn't be surprised if, on average, one of those three attempts went catastrophically wrong.

As someone who demands my devices are my devices, this is complete unacceptable.

As an investor, though - Let's be serious. This is an extension of the "buy here pay here" model loved by used car scammers everywhere to prey on those who can't really afford it but need one anyway. And those are stupidly profitable, because what are people going to do, just not have a car / phone?

It's morally repugnant but fiscally a slam-dunk.

I might have agreed with you 20 years ago.

The rise of modern streaming all but ended music piracy because a cheap and easy legal option is available. We have proof of concept, this is effectively a settled issue.

That's a self-fulfilling prophecy. People generally prefer to stay legal as long as the money is reasonable and the friction to use what you've fairly paid for is sufficiently low.

Meanwhile, we're talking about Microsoft "letting" us do something many of us are already doing via emulation. Gee, you bought a physical disc rather than a worthless digital entitlement? Sucks to be you, pay again... Except... Yeah, I really have no need for this new option when the old one is still superior.

And to be clear, I'm in no way talking about actual piracy. I've paid for a looot of media over my lifetime, and quite often I'll still use a "fixed" version because it's in every way the superior product.

You're proposing we hold kids responsible for violating laws created under the pretense of kids being too irresponsible to safely use social media.

You see the problem there, right?

OK, I'm picking nits.

They do business in the EU. If you do business in a country, you are subject to their rules and regulations.

Ya, thank goodness the U.S. is going to build some new large battleships so that the Russkies, Chinese, NORKS, and Iranians have decent sized targets to shoot at.

The current Ford-class aircraft carriers are decent-sized targets to shoot at. They are bigger than a battleship.

Sometimes I wake up and start doing new science. But usually I just roll over and go back to sleep.

I wouldn't say pragmatic, no. He's tried it, found it works, and now won't listen to the people pointing out the numerous problems with it.

He has pointed out AI's flaws and limitations. He has also said the beneft is it gets him to the starting point more quickly to either figure out a bug or how to do something, or even how to rewrite something he's already done. He is not blindly accepting what it says.

Trust, but verify would be closer to his thinking.

Why is it all these earth like worlds exist, but no signs of life ?

We don't know that. There could be organisms living on one or more of these planets, but we can't detect them. Maybe it's a type of moss or simply bacteria.

Until we visit these planets, we cannot say with any certainty life doesn't exist on these worlds.

17 more years? I can't wait to see people in their 70's through 90's adventuring through the universe. Are stargates handicap-accessible?

Seriously though dude this is actually interesting science news vastly more important than some cheesy show.

Well, yes. For many years, presidential candidates, both Democratic and Republican, referred to the United States as "the indispensible nation". And my reaction was always, "Doesn't that mean the US is a single point of failure for civilization?"

We are currently performing an experiment which addresses this question: can the US enjoy the benefits of soft power without the cost? That's the whole point of obeying *norms*. No individual force is going to punish you if you are treacherous, mercurial, foul-mouthed, disrespectful and generally unpredictable. Everyone will punish you.

I think an inevitable cost of this experiment will be that the world will decide that the US can't be a single point of failure for global democracy any longer. In many ways, that's something that will be good for us. But it's also going to cost us in painful ways. When the world decides to move away from the dollar as the international reserve currency, you will see both inflation and higher interest rates on everything from credit cards to mortgages, to business loans that will offset the export advantages. We will need *more* business investment to shift the economy to producing low value goods again, so the transition will be rocky.