You realise what this story is about right? The answer is no. The entire premise here is that bullshit gets retracted from publication.

You're an optimist, but in the past 30 years we have developed fuck all. We've only taken existing developments and mildly improved them. Not only have we in 30 years not stopped a catastrophic rise in emissions thanks to our new inventions, several of them (AI, crypto, etc) have contributed massively towards them, wasting energy without any practical benefit to society massively cancelling out any improvement.

At some point you should read those "legacy" models. You may find that many of them aren't even old enough to walk unassisted without mama yet. Not only that, but no model spits out a single number. They spit out a range that is based on different development trajectories, and those (the most optimistic of them) include radical new technological development.

I'm sure fusion power is ready any day now.

Until then let's just focus on the 20+ year promise of carbon capture that is currently producing 0.000fuckall% carbon offsetting. What wonderous technology we have /s

Who said build? Datacentre companies are bitching about not having power made available to them. They don't want to build it. They can in theory put themselves off grid if they were willing to pony up the cash, but it's easier to be the government for a handout and saddle the public with the high cost of power.

Sorry buddy but that is horseshit. The war on green predated AI. It was stupid then, and it's stupid now.

Fundamentally that's also bullshit especially for steel production and datacentres especially which can be configured to load follow and gracefully shed performance to suit energy, but in general the cost of sustained renewable generation using wind+solar+storage is now cost competitive with building a coal plant. In fact many actual heavy industry sites are migrating precisely to this very thing, including quite a few in Australia where these companies historically run their own power plants. Turns out running heavy industry from renewables is winning on cost. That said I realise Australia != UK, but then heavy industry and the UK don't go hand in hand anymore either.

You really need to update you knowledge of the industry.

As an off topic note, what is this "oil-change point" that you're referring to? I mean really in numbers. I constantly see people say things like 5k-10k miles. European cars typically have that change point closer to 20k miles. I find a large number of people who don't do the "required" oil change are actually maintaining their cars to a perfectly fine modern standard, they just aren't acting like it's the 1970s anymore.

R&D isn't needed. The likes of USA car companies have no problem selling efficient small vehicles and hybrids the world over. It's that they spent years telling Americans that their penises are too small and that they only solution to make you look desirable is to drive a "car" the size of a small church.

It would be embarrassing for them to have to try and roll back years of marketing to say "hey, so about that big arse thing we told you you need to buy from us... how about a nice small compact?" That would very much lead to customers to say ... "sounds good, I'll try that European one".

All of my cars have gotten that since the really late 90s... (Toyotas, Renaults, VWs) This is a truly pathetic target.

OS use of RAM is borderline irrelevant. Firefox on Linux blows through just as much RAM as it does on Windows. The OS actually uses *MORE* RAM than Win11 (and that's a good thing) thanks to its better caching model. I think we need to stop recommending people install Linux on yesterday's hardware, it puts is on uneven footing against other OSes.

That said ... you can't install MS Teams on Linux so from a RAM consumption point of view that's an absolute win for Linux.

Yes and no. I suspect the enthusiast PC market was on shaky ground from a profit point of view for a long time. I'm honestly surprised the consumer RAM industry supported so many companies providing a product which largely struggled to differentiate itself beyond anything other than blinking LEDs.

The term long-term customer base implies some kind of loyalty which I don't think exists in this market. RAM is a pretty fungible thing and most people just buy whatever suits their performance requirements from whatever company suits the price point. If they leave yeah it hurts us, but I doubt there's negative market implications to this if they decide to reverse course in a few years and start selling again.

I suspect their actual loyal customers are the likes of Dell, HP, Lenovo etc. who very much still have access to their chips.

I never said the GP did. A wise man once wrote on the internet something relevant for you, I'll quote it for you here: "Learn to read fucking dumbass"

Get some professional help buddy. You need it. Before you hurt yourself.

Less than 50 of those provide comprehensive character sets. And a quick flick through them shows a complete lack of creativity between them.

This would make sense if this were something new, but it's not. Bait and Switch are normally short lived scams. We're talking about dropping a plan that has existed for decades, which leads me to the question: why now?

This clearly wasn't a gameplan from the beginning and it would seem that the bigger problem is that there's *no* alternate plan. Rather it looks like the American Mothership is trying to milk some money out of its subsidiary.

And yet the dog being hit still the fault of the owner who put it in harms way. Kind of hard to hit a leashed dog on the sidewalk.

No one is promoting ARM for the purposes of emulating x86. The fact that some efficiency is lost while doing emulation has nothing to do with why a vendor is using ARM.

Yes we've seen it chug, and we've seen it run well. There are wild performance differences between workloads. We've also seen Mac do the same thing, except better, eliminating the chug part and demonstrating that emulation is viable for day to day work as well.

How? Not technically, but from a business point of view. How do you convince people to change their practices for a niche use case that will generate fuck-all in product sales? Maybe this is actually their end goal, but emulation has to be the stepping stone or the entire industry will write you off not so much as an "also-ran" but a "never-started".

You don't have a choice of one or the other. You usually have a choice of one or nothing. Making native games for niche platforms is not worth the time and investment of developers.