I worked with HP-UX in 1990/1991, when it was still HP-UX 7.1. I was once credited in Emacs 19.10 for porting it to HP-UX 9.x in 1993. At the time, a friend of mine coded a variant of Atari's MIDImaze for UNIX, and we were playing netmaze on a pool of HP-UX workstations in the university's computer pool, because the new PA-RISC architecture was REALLY fast compared to anything Sun SPARC or x86 had to offer.

Parts of Alpha AXP live on in AMD's processor line-up though. The front side bus is a direct successor of Alpha's front side bus, and x86-64 is heavily inspired by Alpha's architecture too.

Avionics can currently only be certified to use GPS (or maybe in theory GLONASS, but I don't think anyone outside of Russia's sphere of influence would do that). In the US, the FAA recognizes a bunch of RTCA guidance documents like DO-208 and DO-229, but those only cover GPS. DO-401 is new (the European equivalent, ED-259, was formally published one revision earlier) and allows use of multiple constellations, but is recognized in the industry as not ready to be certified against. The same is basically true for Europe and the Pacific Rim: they either recognize the RTCA DOs as applicable, or recognize the EUROCAE ED that is harmonized with the RTCA DO.

The jammers on L1/E1 probably affect both GPS and Galileo similarly (Galileo has slightly wider bandwidth on E1, but most of the energy is in the L1 C/A part). Until a year or so ago, most jammers and spoofers were single-frequency and GPS-only -- but new jammers and spoofers are multifrequency and multiconstellation, so even having DFMC avionics wouldn't be a universal fix now.

The long term solution is going to involve beamforming or similar active antenna techniques. Those are also still being standardized, and the Ukraine war is driving the state of the art for military CRPAs.

You can get old business laptops for a few bucks on lots of places, like online retailers, refurbished sites or eBay. They are quite solid, can be upgraded for cheap, and will last for a long time. That's where I got the T14 from - for less than $250, and that's what I use for my 3D printing, for my web browsing and for the occasional game. And you don't find that many business laptops with AMD processors. I don't buy a computer for its CPU. If it works, it's fine for me.

Because not everyone playing on Steam has a big, powerful gaming rig. I myself am on Steam, but the computer I use to play the occasional game is an old Lenovo T14 laptop - with an Intel CPU. People like me playing on their laptops really tilt the balance towards Intel.

Name a specific problem and couch it in terms of memory bandwidth, memory capacity, and FLOPS -- then we can figure out whether GPUs are a good fit. Arm.waving about "data warehouse capabilities" doesn't cut it. Most of the time, the difficulty will be in getting the data you want into the database you want to process it, rather than how far the database can give you an answer.

For example, people don't tend to put databases on GPUs unless they do full scans of the data multiple times each second, because other use cases work just fine with CPU+RAM(+disk). Sometimes that means they have to wait a few minutes instead of seconds for an answer -- but they can do the math for how much that costs them compared to infrastructure. But if they don't have the data imported already, that's gotta of labor and importing it, and GPUs won't help there.

Even expensive GPUs are cheap compared to AI accelerator cards, and the profit margins are lower (in percent) as well. An H200 card reportedly goes for $30,000 and up, about 20 times as much as a RTX 5080. Nvidia's margin (in percent of sales price) is probably two or three times as much for the H200 -- so they need to sell a hugely larger number of GPUs to make the same profit. If AI demand went to near zero, Nvidia would still have a very healthy business but their profits would drop enormously.

Yes, but (a) that number for all of 2024 is less than the 4Q 2025 number for the AVP, and (b) Cybertruck sales in 2025 fell off a cliff compared to 2024, totalling something like 16100 vehicles over the first three quarters.

You wanted me to answer how you can build a value system without a deity telling you what to do. Job done.

The question how to find meaning in life is a different question. But I already gave an answer with me hinting at Existentialism. (I personally don't believe in an universal meaning of life. I happen to exist, and so I have to do with what I got, and that's just me. This is pretty close to, but not the same as Existentialism.)

No. All I need is me. Do I want to be killed? Do I want to be molested? Do I want do be robbed? Do I want to be lied to?

As I don't want those things happen to me, I don't do them to others, because I only can expect others not to do them to me, if they can be assured I don't do it to them. I don't need pre-existing values. I just have to accept everyone else to be like me.

(This is just the simple version. The more elaborate version of the rule is Kant's Categorical Imperative: "Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law." We could also go into Existentialism and postulate that personal freedom, individual responsibility, and deliberate choice are essential to the pursuit of self-discovery and the determination of life's meaning.)

The Golden Rule is quite sufficient as an universal value. Another one is the universal dignity of everybody. Both answer your questions sufficiently.

You don't kill the poor and the sick, because you don't want to be killed if you get poor and sick. You tell the truth because you don't want to be lied to. You want to give people making bad decisions a chance of redemption, because you want the chance of redemption if you fail. No God needed.

I subscribe to H.L.Mencken's attitude though:

"Because I don't like the result, I redefine 'No Religion' to an arbitrary meaning and come to a result of 95% Christian."

Exactly. That's why the separation of State and Church is important. And it had to be forced upon Christianity which was used to 1500 years of being a state religion.

Religious tolerance was forced upon Christianity by the horrors of the 30years War, when Christians murdered Christians for being the wrong kind of Christian, and when the Puritans did the same in Great Britain with everyone who only slightly diverted from their idea of Christianity.

That's why in the U.S. constitution, it is clearly stated that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; [...]", because of the horrors of Christian intolerance. That's why one of the central ideas of the Enlightenment was the Freedom of Religion, the freedom to chose whatever you want to believe in. Grudgingly, Christian communities agreed, but needed another 150 years to do so.

Religious tolerance is not a feature of modern Christianity. It only exists because of exterior forces.

The actual fucking clods here are the ones who (a) blame unnamed "AI oligarchs" for what randos do and (b) pretend that 501(c)3 means "doing God's Work", especially when the instant example is spamming people with AI slop.