Teachers were never not Democrats. It's been a Democrat institution from the start, due to the close Marxist affinity and the predominance of women in the field.

So many logical fallacies in there, buddy.

If you want these things, then you will pay for a good public education.

This presumes that "good public education" is being funded with tax money. It is, conclusively, not. It has in fact been getting significantly worse - which is why people are opting out of it.

Do you want educated neighbors?

No formal education is, in most cases, better than bad formal education. I'd rather my neighbors not be stupid but think they know something, which is what the last 50 years has produced.

Who you can hire for your business? Who will have enough income to purchase your product? Who will be employed and can adapt their skills to a rapidly changing environment?

There's no evidence that education can elevate someone over their inborn genetic potential. You've either got the building blocks for intelligence or you don't. See also the last several centuries of 3rd world "enrichment" that's been carried out by one means or another - education, charity, etc. - of places like India and Africa. I'm sure you can look up average IQs if it's of interest.

Who will be employed and can adapt their skills to a rapidly changing environment?

I can hire a home schooled person, then? Because this criteria definitely doesn't fit your average public schooled individual.

Who will know how to make healthy choices for themselves and for their neighbors (you)?

Yes, the Food Pyramid, D.A.R.E., and "Sex Ed" had a fantastic impact on society's wellness trajectory - I'm sure we can all agree on that, right? (This is sarcasm.)

Who will carefully consider and thinking critically about public issues and use that knowledge when they vote?

OK, now I know you were being facetious. There's no way you're talking about state schooled kids here.

This is the wrong approach. Perhaps it'd have been accepted earlier, but they've shot themselves in the foot due to their inaction over the grooming pedophilia groups that were operating with impunity - and seemingly, protection! - on their platform. It was brought to their attention repeatedly, publicly, and they did all the wrong things and did not address the issue.

Fuck them.

It can be a viable strategy to lean into bad news perhaps even more than is warranted. When you proclaim in 3-4 months time that you've overcome that disadvantage, people find that marginally more credible, even if that is wrong.

When you speak *exclusively* in CEO optimism speak, at some point people just stop believing anything positive you say.

The NVidia cloud isn't new. It's been around for 3-4 years now at this point and seems pretty mature. It also works far better than Stadia ever dreamed.

I was able to play through multiple games I'd purchased specifically for the purposes of playing them on Nvidia Now, because I didn't have a gaming computer but wanted to complete the titles (Cyberpunk 2077 and Mechwarrior 5). The 'free' tier was irritating with wait times, but was playable. The higher tiers were far better and other than a rare ISP-related stutter (at 80ms or so, no less), and it ran great.

This means it's definitely playable at the 30-40ms that a person would get on Starlink (which I later got, and tested, and it worked even better). $10/mo for a couple months seemed like a pretty fair price for something that enables gaming. It wasn't a great experience on hotel wireless, but that's barely ever usable for much more than email. Keep in mind, I'm not a 'gaming snob' focused on FPS or graphics so much as the gameplay and experience, so I'm sure there's some aspect there that I overlooked, but $30-50 for a winter of gaming beats $500+ for the computer to do so. I just used a Macbook Air.

And it doesn't work the way you think it does. It's basically like, from what I can tell, RDP specialized for gaming. You can play it from anything that can support basic framerates and uses remote rendering. The game dispatches and loads onto a 'thin' Windows client of some sort, and it integrates with GoG, Steam, and a number of other gaming services.

Well, we revived the sporophyte after nine months.
Sporophyte?
Mm-hm.
You said you've got a sporophyte?
Uh-huh.
Say again?
We have a sporophyte!

Compared to what was available before, it is quite impressive.

The negative feedback is prompted by the fact that AI is constantly being shoved into every one of our orifices 24/7 by every vaguely tech-related company as if it was the second coming of Jesus. To justify that amount of social pressure, it would indeed have to be quite a bit better than it actually is, and that's why people aren't impressed.

If that CEO thinks the behaviors of the LLMs are "super smart", then I really wonder about his level of intelligence...

IT's certainly novel and different and can handle sorts of things that were formerly essentially out of reach of computers, but they are very much not "smart".

Processing that is dumb but with more human-like flexibility can certainly be useful, but don't expect people to be in awe of some super intelligence when they deal with something that seems to get basic things incorrect, asserts such incorrect things confidently, and doubles down on the same mistakes after being steered toward admitting the mistakes by interaction. I know, I also described how executives work too, but most of us aren't convinced that executives have human intelligence either.

This.

My take on vibe coding is simple: Don't.

At least not the way most people understand it. I'm totally ok with having an AI do the tedious work. But only do it on stuff you could do yourself (i.e. you're just saving time). Because otherwise, you'll never be able to maintain it.

This, in general, is the whole problem: The entire "vibe coding" movement only worries about CREATING code. But in the real world, maintaining, updating, refactoring, reviewing, testing, bugfixing, etc. etc. are typically more effort than writing it in the first place.

"It's my estimation that every man ever got a statue made of him was one kind of a son of a bitch or another." --Malcolm Reynolds

(Ironically applies well to Joss Whedon himself. Kind of wonder if one of the show writers was thinking about Joss when they wrote that...)

The only single-source point of failure is me.

You mean, why does Linus keep agreeing to be interviewed, and then reply to straightforward questions with the obvious answers?

What would you rather he do? Refuse to be interviewed, or maybe make up unexpected answers just to be edgy?

All engineering problems are to an extent. In the final analysis, in 47 years, I've found that it's mostly moving the problem from one in-box to another in-box. The problem is still there, but now it's not your in-box.

Taking your last point - time. Time is what you're seeing as a steady state. Will Microsoft still be interested in power in 20 years? Will they form a shell corporation to sign that contract, then bankrupt it once their needs are gone? So many business use this "one simple trick" to get subsidies or reduced rates, then almost inevitably leave the taxpayer with the sack to when it suits their profit model to exit their obligations.

Question: What do you use to power the air flow for that air cooling system, and how many watts would it draw to meet the same caloric (or BTU, if you prefer) cooling of using water versus air. It's a simple formula to work out the differing efficiencies of using which fluid, air or water, you'd prefer for non-forced draft cooling. It gets a bit more involved calculating the power needs for forced draft cooling. No matter what you do though, your cooling is going to consume a portion of your power output, reducing overall efficiency, and thus adding to the time to meet ROI. The reason engineers use PWR reactors is that it makes the business math work, and other methods to date do not.

Mercy snip
You left out several options:
1. Don't use WCR's. MHD or PBR are a thing too. (See final line)
2. Use Geothermal cooling. Not aware of anything outside of paper but as long as you have a sink cooler than your source, you're good. (hint: The rocks can only absorb so much heat before you've exceeded their ability to sink any more and thus overheat your installation.)
3. Dump waste heat into salt vats, rotate the salt vats to allow natural cooling. (Molten salt cooling).
4. Use micro reactors like Toshiba and Samsung have developed. Put the power plant where the power is needed.
But none of those are commercially feasible without forever government subsidies. Again, privatizing the profit, socializing the cost.

I think I saw someone swimming in some sewage en route from scraping a bear carcass off the road, let me go check.

Broadly speaking, a lot of the 'cloud native' stuff are complex solutions to potentially complex problems that fit within the parameters that those approaches can handle.

If you don't have those complex problems, then it's a premature optimization that is painful. If your use case is not the sort of use case resembling the bread and butter of the applications that instigated these approaches, then it's all pain, no gain.

There was a team that maintained a project that was broadly panned for not being good enough. The developers decided that the cure for what ails them would be changing to 'cloud native' approach, despite the complaints really being about limited functionality, not even about performance or scaling issues. Now on top of having the same functionality complaints *now* they have performance and reliability complaints too, and they have no idea what they are doing, they just arbitrarily carved their single fixed instance of software into a couple of dozen fixed instances of services (they can't figure out how to scale arbitrarily, so they still have exactly one instance of every component). Not one of them is capable of debugging the convoluted network situation they've created, and the logging information is just a mess.