A higher resolution makings things small is due to poorly designed software.
Sizes should be specified in real world units (eg 1pt is 1/72 of an inch), not arbitrary measurements like pixels.
A higher resolution screen when used properly just results in more detail. Things will only get smaller if you decide to scale them down, by default they should be the same size.

The Republican party is going medieval.

Volatility in DRAM spot prices certainly isn't anything new; but it probably doesn't help that we've got a push by the high end vendors to move more HBM at fancy AI part margins while also being at the somewhat annoying point in the DDR4/DDR5 transition where you can still put together a pretty plausible computer with either; but you need to pick a completely different GPU to do so; rather than it being one of those where memory controllers currently support both and it's just a question of how they laid the motherboard out.

DDR4 parts were hanging around because they were only modestly less powerful and platform costs were lower; but if DDR4 prices move unexpectedly that's a lot of writing down someone is going to have to do and potentially some rapid shifts in the ratio of DDR4 to DDR5 parts.

I wonder if that is what they are alluding to when they say ""People with less than a college education are creating a lot of value — and sometimes more value than people with a college education — using our product".

Depending on how finished and drop-in vs. how in need of fiddly integration and customization at the customer site for their systems 'our product' is the open roles implied by that line could range from "you could be an analyst monkey; maybe even analyst monkey II if you seem like a bright sort!" to some more intricate and visible customer facing integration project stuff(which is were some outfits probably would have a cultural preference for candidates with prestige credentials); but when c-suite says that you can create value as a user that normally isn't to be read as a statement that there are openings at their level; and if they wanted to be either more vague or differently specific they could have been.

No! Thiel hand picked and groomed JD Vance then demanded Trump pick him for VP. He went low profile but likely did more harm in this election from behind the shadows and missed gunshots.

Don't worry; the glorious agentic future also includes firing everyone who isn't far enough up the food chain to have a proper office. Won't be a problem.

Designed to sound more dramatic than it may actually be.

It seems worth mentioning that they are specifically saying that among people they hire they don't treat prestigious degrees differently and sometimes get better results from people without them. They don't actually say anything about whether they ignore degrees in hiring; or whether they find a correlation between degrees and hireability.

The statement is certainly constructed to sound more dramatic than that; and depending on their hiring practices it may actually be; but "if we think you are good enough to hire we don't continue to uphold a caste system based on where you did undergrad" is not a terribly radical position to take. Not one that everyone actually does take; but not terribly uncommon.

As it almost always goes -- this legislation restricting direct vehicle sales from manufacturers is only around today because the car dealership middle-man is a powerful money-generating force, and most auto-makers seem to prefer it stays in place.

Tesla got their "carve out" because they had the money to throw at getting made an exception. Rivian should automatically get the same treatment, but we don't live in a country where laws are applied fairly to all.

In many ways, a dealership network acts as a shield to absolve a manufacturer of direct responsibility for dealing with their own defective products. Take Kia as a great example. They've been producing defective engines across a whole line of vehicles for something like 10 years straight. Most managed to hold up through their "generous 10 year, 100,000 mile" warranty but failed soon after it. The landscape is littered with Kia Souls with major engine failures. But dealers act like a filter, putting up barriers to getting them replaced or repaired, despite the manufacturer being legally forced to issue a recall. They'll tell people, "Sorry.. but the recall is only valid if we get this specific diagnostic code from the code reader. Yours isn't showing that one." Each time, the owner has to go to corporate and fight to try to get their engine replaced -- and corporate will counter that the dealer informed them the issue wasn't one indicative of the specific failure that's being recalled. Eventually? SOME people get their vehicles fixed, but a substantial number of others give up the fight, writing off their maybe 8-10 year old vehicle as trash and they buy something else. This constitutes a huge savings for Kia corporate.

It's tougher for manufacturers doing direct sales. They can still reject people for warranty work, or claim recalls don't apply. But now, there's nobody else to blame. They can't just get the customer mad at "Sellum Quick Auto Sales". Now, the wronged customer's response is to never buy from their brand again.

Ah dagnabbit, I should have clicked the link first. Laziness finally yet again bit me on the arse :D.

Thanks for the link, I wasn't previously aware of this Epstein guy. Pretty convoluted situation, isn't it?

There is intelligent hyperbole skillfully used to underscore a point.

Then there's this.

You get to call him a dictator if and when he is elected for another four years.

Pessimistic worldviews tend to lead to a sucky life, no matter the surrounding circumstances.

Just saying...

Burning plastic properly is better than recycling. So little is recycled and even that does not get many cycles!

The real solution is to just put it into the ground. Figure out what to do centuries from now. It's cheap carbon storage... while burning it releases gases.

Also, simply BANNING plastics and regulating the types of plastics would go a long long way. Short life bioplastics for disposables and banning in other cases.

We should figure out how to add MORE Carbon to plastics...

This just signifies the end of the era of "fashion model" as a lucrative career choice?

I'm not a fan of AI getting used in marketing/advertising at all. But that's mostly because I find most of it can still be picked out from reality. When they try to create new animated characters or mascots, for example? The AI attempts I've seen, so far, just have this set of features that clue you in that they aren't original drawings by a person. With people, they may be getting pretty good at starting with an AI generated person and letting a real artist Photoshop it to fix it/clean it up so it passes as real. But mostly, we're still used to seeing the people with odd numbers of fingers or toes and other AI mishaps.

When they get this honed to perfection? Yeah, it's not going to make a lot of sense to pay real humans to model clothing for your average sale flyers or online ads. The value will still be there for a popular celebrity figure to wear something in an ad, because then you're buying that association with their fame. But I think most models should come to grips with the idea the gravy train is reaching the end of the line.