So basically the only reason you can think of why she didn't win, is because she is a she and she is not white?

You might need a little more nuance in your analysis.

He said exactly what he was going to do, and they voted for it. You aren't then allowed to say "oh my goodness, we had no idea that THIS is what he was going to do" - half the electorate saw it and voted against it. If 75 million people figured it out, what's wrong with the 77 million that couldn't?

VP Harris was saying what he was going to do, according to the Project 2025 manifesto. They were going to take a wrecking ball to government services writ large. And that's exactly what happened.

Trump himself was saying what he was going to do when it comes to the worst abuses we've seen to the rule of law: the mass deporation thuggery, the illegal recissions of approved Congressional spending LAWS, the constitutionally illegal here-today gone-tomorrow tariffs, the un-nuanced hamfisted cuts to government causing even less efficiency, the ridiculous tax breaks we can't afford to people that don't need them, etc. There should be no surprises here if anyone actually listened to the words coming from his mouth.

And somehow Trump voters are shocked that what he said he was going to do, is what he's doing. Not exactly the smartest folk if they are surprised by any of this, are they?

Vote better. Don't vote for the guy telling you he really wants to fuck you over to benefit his rich friends at your expense.

When a collection of people decide to self-identify as deplorable shitbags that would like to starve people in order to gain political power, they might get a few nasty things said about them.

Don't want to be demonized? Stop using cruelty as leverage in politics.

Let's do a little Occam's Razor analysis of your theory:

Which is more probable:
- Democrats have entered into a half-century spanning "we hope we're right" conspiracy to do a double fake-out on apparently easily manipulated Republicans to bitch and moan about debt and deficits for the last 50 years (and not doing anything about it while in power until *this year*) while temporarily speaking to the needs of impoverished and working class people until they eventually unravel the entire global economy into a collapsed twisted flaming wreckage of human civilization;

- Democrats are trying to prevent impoverished and working class people from having massive cost-of-living increases that will cause tens of millions of people to decide "do I buy my medicine or food this week" so that incredibly rich people can have a few pennies on each tax dollar back that they, by definition, do not need.

I think I know which one is more probable.

Well, the "very unpleasant people" have already taken over and now control the US Mint presses. Do you really think they aren't going to fire up those presses to their own advantage, after seeing that they have no problem putting tens of millions of people into starvation risk to save a few bucks on their own taxes?

This administration has no moral center. Stop acting like they do - they're literally using hunger as a political weapon.

Yes they have.

Try to keep up.

Also, why do you get to decide what her name is? I'm pretty sure that self-determination is one of those core values we share as Americans, enshrined in the Declaration of Independence. If she wants to have a last name of Occasio-Cortez, that's her decision - not yours.

Jesus H. Christ.

So we should be congratulating the guy who sews division at every chance he gets for reluctantly continuing to nominate a singular Democrat to head an agency with no political clout whatsoever?

All this does is prove that the label "billionaire" means more than either political party label to this President, which should come as news to absolutely nobody.

This is what I was thinking - RAM guys have been stacking chips for a hell of a long time. First as actual package stacks on the DIMM - I remember seeing some very dense modules in the DDR2 days with stacked packages; and then as you correctly point out: Samsung has been layering dies inside the package for years as a microscopic version of stacking chip packages.

It's also why DIMMs have heat spreaders on them now.

My guess is that they aren't targeting performance, but rather making a lower power system-on-chip that really is a fully-featured system-on-a-chip and incorporates lots of low-power and low-heat peripheral crap like I2C / serial / USB / SATA in addition to RAM, flash storage, NIC, etc. - put the highest wattage bits on the top for direct interface with the heat spreader, and stack the other stuff below with some thermal magic in the sandwich to move as much heat from the lower layers to the edges as possible so you aren't adding to the thermal load of the CPU core from below.

This kind of thing could be really cool in the low-power embedded / industrial controller space where nobody is looking for laptop performance out of a chip. But you are trading one complexity for another: instead of having to use a lot of geometric area to mount and connect all the peripherals to the CPU, you end up with a shitload of thermal management problems for a very compact system without the geometric area requirement.

Unfortunately, that geometric area really helps with the thermal problems.

This was my thought too - if you have essentially 6 layers of silicon with insulators between to create 600% of the transistor density, you're also consuming >600% of the power (nothing is ever 100% efficient) and therefore producing >600% of the wattage to dissipate without a corresponding size in radiative surface area.

How do you not cook the center of the cube when we're already throwing 70W into a single chip the size of your fingernail? Maybe central heat pipes that each layer hooks up to, running vertically through the die? And how much area per layer do you lose to that, at what increased manufacturing complexity (read: cost and reduction in yields)?

I'm sure those are all answerable engineering questions to present if the value is there. And my guess is that since it's very obvious that stacking chips is a sure-fire way to increase transistor area, that the value hasn't been worth the added complexity to solve the inherent problems because die shrinks were always cheaper and easier to do... right up until they aren't.

It's good that someone is asking the question and showing that it can be done. But I'd wager [paywall so couldn't RTFA to confirm] that they aren't exactly stacking up the highest performance Xeon or Epyc chips 41 high and running them at full throttle.

Or more reasonably: Russia or China "accidentally" dropping / dragging an anchor across it's path and crippling the US Government cloud-based operations for weeks by fucking over their prime cloud contractor.

You don't have to think too hard to figure out what Amazon will do with it.

They have massive datacenters at either end, in Loudon County, Virginia (US-East-1, GovCloud) and Cork, Ireland.

This is going to be their own private backhaul connecting regions in North America and Europe.

They're already planning on drilling a tunnel for hundreds of miles under an ocean. I think handling a bay that is tens of miles across won't be a problem.

More than that, apparently they forgot about the eMate and the iBook lines of low-cost notebooks Apple has made over the decades.

You don't know anything about how taxes in Oregon work.

Hint: we have a property tax that pays for stuff at the county level. 9-digit construction cost datacenters are worth quite a bit of property tax to counties that are largely agricultural and would otherwise have a low tax base.

But do go on only considering one slice of the governmental revenue pie without looking at the much larger slice sitting right next to it.