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.

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.

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.

Which "AI oligarchs" are directing the nonprofit that generated these emails? I don't recognize any of the names listed at https://sage-future.org/, but maybe one of them is who you are talking about?

Repeating a lie doesn't make it true. They do look at sales tax, for example in Table 3 -- but primarily that entire paper is a survey of papers that measure tax progressivity, so they talk about how the literature differs. So they don't dwell on sales tax. After all, it represents under 17% of US tax income, compared to 40% for income tax and 24% for payroll/social security taxes. Property tax is 11%, so it doesn't get much attention either.

If you want to be upset about consumption taxes being regressive, look at other OECD countries: they raise much more of their tax revenue from consumption tax, in the form of VAT. The US has much lower rates for sales tax, so the effect of that regressivity is less here.

You're obsessing over roughly a quarter of US rax revenues in order to avoid admitting that the overall tax system is probably the most progressive one in the world. The original complaint in this thread is based on fiction -- a fiction that you apparently want to propagate.

Yes, you are. You ignored the context of that sentence: that Saez and Zucman were being inconsistent in that allocation because otherwise "They argue that the appropriate incidence assumption for distributional
  analysis is to allocate taxes based on remittance obligations." That would mean allocating sales tax to the retailer. The sentence you complained about is not in any way an argument to ignore sales tax, it is merely part of the explanation for why Saez and Zucman were excluded from the literature survey.

Your link doesn't discuss changes in progressivity over time. The US has probably the most progressive tax system in the world (https://www.fraserinstitute.org/studies/measuring-tax-progressivity-high-income-countries-oecd doesn't quantify it for the US as a whole, but "the US tax system is even more progressive than Canada"). It has gotten more progressive over time, including definitely during the Silent Generation and Baby Boomers. See, for example, https://chicagounbound.uchicag... and https://taxfoundation.org/blog...: "The reality is that, since the inception of the modern federal individual income tax in 1913, the US tax code has generally become more progressive, not less." (Emphasis on the original.)

That's absolutist in a rather silly way. A number of statistical "machine learning" techniques are correct by construction -- if you ask the right question. Kernel methods like support vector machines work very well. If they exhibit a "wrong" answer then it means the original problem included an incorrect assumption or omitted important data -- and any technique is liable to give a wrong answer in those cases.

Definitely don't use LLM-generated code without scrutiny, but it's not bad as a starting point or as a source for potential approaches. It's also not bad for code review: I asked gpt-oss to adapt some (not yet tested) code in a certain way, and it noticed a cut-and-paste error in addition to adapting the code. I ended up not using that adaptation, but the big report was helpful.

One can -- and I think should -- be skeptical of lots of things about LLMs, from business models and environmental impacts to quality of output, but one should not disregard them totally.

Some of us even use a web site that limits posts to using an eight-bit character set with only text-oriented markup.

AC wasn't. Barack Obama was: https://www.huffpost.com/entry... . You know, the guy who earlier asked for a favor from the Russians to help him get re-elected: https://www.reuters.com/articl... .

Sure, but what good does it do you if it is encrypted and mostly goes to a single cloud endpoint? You can see the traffic volume over time, and that's about it.

DJI were spying on users: https://www.thedroneu.com/blog...

If you're ethnically Chinese, China will use your relatives to pressure you to do what they want, and might stalk you or drag you into one of their overseas police departments for interrogation or torture.

China collects huge amounts of data on everyone they can, from everywhere they can, just in case. Unlike in the US, they don't need a reason to investigate you. https://www.discoursemagazine....

If you carry electronics into China, or ship them through its ports, you can expect it to end up with implants. They want the offensive capability even if they don't know when they would use it.
( https://thehackernews.com/2024... talks about one distributed electronically, but you don't want them to hold your devices.)

Travel within China is risky: https://www.peoplenewstoday.co...