You're the one making the claim that modern frontier models still make this mistake (they don't), so how about you go to a frontier model, reproduce what you're claiming happens, and click the "share" button and post the link here?

Don't worry, I'll wait.

Your inability to reproduce the thing that you claim happens is duly noted.

You are speaking irrelevant nonsense. LLMs are trained in words

They are not. They are trained in tokens. Tokens do not align with word boundaries, and an arbitrary word can be tokenized in many different ways.

and they think in words

They do not. They don't even think in tokens. The process is: words are split to tokens, tokens point to an embedding position (latent space) while RoPE encodes a relative position, and all reasoning is done within latent space, which is not at all verbal (concepts are directions in latent space, and math is done on concepts, not words).

Also, a note: when spec'ing a generator, you need to know how much you're planning to use it vs. batteries. If it's only going to be used rarely, you prefer low mass, low volume, low cost, and low maintenance when unused (at the cost of low efficiency and higher maintenance in use), whereas if it's going to be used a lot, you prefer high efficiency and low maintenance cost in use, even if at the cost of higher mass, volume, cost, and maintenance when unused. In the former case, you'd prefer to allocate that extra mass, volume, and money into a larger battery pack.

That's why you don't use a tiny petrol generator? Diesel generator efficiencies are roughly:

Small backup generator (1-15kW): ~20-28%
Midsize backup generator (20-200kW): ~30-35%
Large industrial generator (200-2000kW): ~35-42%

Also, ironically this company's plan of the trailer providing a boost will actually make the tractor less efficient. ICE engines use "brake specific fuel consumption" (BSFC) graphs to plot their efficiencies across different RPMs and different torques. You can see an example for a small diesel engine here. Note that they require very high torque conditions and relatively high power conditions to be efficient. You can change the balance between torque and RPM within a given power band (blue) via gearing but gearing doesn't change what power band you're in. If you're in a low power band, you're fundamentally forced into inefficiency (note also that you're not going to be driving around at 1000 RPM just over a stall all the time).

Indeed, if you were forced into a low power band, you'd actually be better off with a series hybrid powertrain, as the engine can alternate between operating in an efficient powerband and shutting down. Of course, parallel hybrids are more efficient than series (albeit with added complexity and mass).

The major advantage is being able to use an engine that's worthless for acceleration, e.g. Atkinson cycle. All ICEs are most efficient at a specific point on the torque/RPM chart so that's not the differentiator.

Regen braking is the biggest benefit in the city. It's essentially irrelevant everywhere else, but whether it matters most or not depends on where you're driving.

Unfortunately, the math doesn't work that way (even ignoring that a 400kWh battery is very small). Battery packs taper the closer you get to full, they're not a constant power all the way. Unless your battery pack can take 400kW at 80%, you're not charging that quickly.

Also, while 40 mins is fine in Europe (breaks: 45 minutes every 4,5 hours of driving... though using 70% of a 400kWh pack on a loaded class 8 truck going even at a slow 80kph will only take you 2 1/2h of driving in "average" conditions, so the truck's range is fundamentally undersized), the US is 30 minutes total break in 11 hours of driving, so ~6 hours on your first leg and ~5h on your second leg with 30 minutes to fill that 5h of driving. And US speed limits are usually faster for trucks than in the EU, so higher consumption. EU really needs 600kWh and >=600kW charging, while the US needs 800-1000kWh and >MW charging.

Note that in all of this we're assuming efficient-shaped trucks (Tesla Semi or the like), not your typical EU bricks, along with a well optimized powertrain and an efficient tyre config. If not, you need to increase those packs and charge powers further.

Nothing could be more compatible with American crony capitalism than just continually building retirement homes in SD and sending poor old people there to die. But they will need to find some way to give out some nursing degrees.

True, because they will never have any self-awareness in SD or any other flyover state. They will cry and complain about how they can't attract these professionals but they won't make any changes to the shitty society that drove those people away in the first place.

There are people who would prefer the weather there, but still won't move there because they don't want to deal with the provincial hicks in sticks bullshit. THAT is the non-starter, which as you said, is not going to change.

Wow, only $551/mo? I see silver premiums as high as $900 being paid for by APTC. It's a good thing we did obamacare instead of Medicare for all! Otherwise, how would those poor insurance company shareholders become richer?

What? Yes, of course they will.

You mean by raising salaries? Muppet.

Mouse buttons and config dialogs are both confusing to you but I'm getting worse?

Oh that's an interesting concept. What we could do is do it every year, put in place a legal system to manage it. Actually we could also recongise that the single figure doesn't suit everyone perfectly and have them make filings if they want to deviate from it. Then we could for want of a better word "return" the money.

No it doesn't rely on VCs knowing anything. Where a billionaire lives has no relation directly to where the VC funds end up. For example, notice how Musk lives in Texas but the first project for Boring company is not in Texas?

Project and company expenditure does not follow the residential address of a billionaire. They follow the movement of individual companies.

I mean that's a great conspiracy, and the RAM industry has known to act as a cartel in the past, but there is literally zero evidence for that right now. By all accounts both from companies, analysists and 3rd party suppliers all RAM producers are producing at full capacity.

The only "control" of supply right now is the choice of whether to invest in more capacity.

In virtually all cases save for a carefully coordinated cartel (for which again, there's zero evidence right now) the math part works out to be "as much as possible" as this maximises profits universally when you don't have a complete monopoly of the industry.

The OP's post only works in conspiracy land.