Sir, your side has shot the man who demonstrated how left's ideas don't hold up in debates in the neck on front of his children.

And then your types are on the record going into the streets singing "we got Charlie in the neck" and other similar heinous shit.

Sit down.

Not talking about VRAM or unified memory. Regular DRAM.

There's been a lot of advancement recently on how to best manage MoE expert swapping (FreeToken is just one example).

How are you connecting to Slashdot from the year 2024?

If you have ~128 GB of RAM, consider Qwen 3.8 Flash + Freetoken. You'll only get half the tok/s as 27B but the quality is significantly higher than 27B - it beats it solidly in all compared benchmarks (for example, DeepSWE 1.1: 42,2% vs 58.7%).

Grok is a "discount model". It's cheaper than Claude Sonnet yet better than it. Doesn't compare to Fable or Opus, but then again, they're way more expensive models.

Note: I avoid using Grok - not just for the Musk factor, but because there are better options, e.g. GLM-5.3 and Qwen-3.8. Also, if you really want to save money, GLM-5.3 Flash and Qwen-3.8 Flash are amazingly good for their price range.

[ConfusedMathLady.gif]

It's the same shit porn sites asked kids in the 1990s. "What is your date of birth".

Yes sir, I was born on january 1st 1970. Now let me the see the titties.

Ed Zitron is a moron who has predicted the past nine out of zero AI crashes, who simultaneously gets paid to hate on AI while also getting paid to promote AI (DoNotPay).

The funny thing is that he openly acknowledges that inference is very profitable (~40% margins) for all parties - he just argues that you should count training. But that argument makes no sense, because if capital tightens across the AI industry, then everyone will cut back on training and scaleup, and... then what? Where's the implosion? Everyone is profitable then. You may lose certain players in competition against others (their as-mentioned profitable assets being gobbled up by others), but the industry remains healthy.

There are more dramatic types of possible contagion risk, but they all end up with *someone* holding onto the high-profit-generating inference assets, even if it's high-seniority investors, leaving the the low seniority investoors high and dry.

The enshittification of Cursor continues.

Maybe this will force them to support more open models.

Honey, no one cares about academia any more. It's been studied by people who replaced them after far left subverted the academia. The corpos. And you can see the results not because they publish what they find, but because they act to generate results they want in reality based on things they found by studying each subject.

Refer to Spotify's current recommendations algorithm for details. Log in as a young person and observe as your recommendations rapidly take you down the AI music route.

Because that's what gets best retention and best payout.

Meanwhile, what those evil liberals think should happen to YOU is... that you be given healthcare and a general social safety net.

They've been launching dummysats from Starship for a number of launches now, so I'm not sure why you think they're "forever away". The only reasons they've been using dummysats and not actual satellites is 1) Not wanting to risk more valuable payloads thusfar, and 2) wanting to keep Starship suborbital (e.g. trajectory that reintersects the atmosphere) at just under orbital velocity until they can verify deorbit reliability (failure to do so would leave that massive ship falling onto a random point on Earth).

If they were to choose to, they could start launching payloads on all subsequent Starship missions, even if they're not yet ready for reliable recovery or quick reuse. In fact, given the killing off of Falcon 9 in Florida, one can presume that's the plan (if not immediately, then soon).

Um... no they're not?

Further reading: Musk's other unstated reasons for shutting down Falcon 9 in Florida (Behind The Black)

TL/DR, the author thinks that SpaceX shutting down Falcon 9 launches from Florida was secretly a magnanimous gesture by a charitable Elon Musk to boost the competition:

I therefore honestly believe that SpaceX’s decision was not entirely based on its own internal needs. Those needs certainly were the main motive, but based on Elon Musk’s passionate dream of making the human race multi-planetary, as well as his repeated willingness to help his competitors when they needed SpaceX to launch their satellites, I believe he recognized that SpaceX’s dominance could be hurting the rest of the rocket industry, and that the instant it made business sense to clear the field for these competitors, he was quite willing to do so.

LOL.

Yes, I remember way back when Mike Pence had nearly absolute unchecked authoritarian power.