Like high speed photography, small lenses require a lot of light, and are useless without it. I wonder how practical something like this can be? At the very least they're going to need to be paired with some pretty high tech image sensors. Regardless, it also brings into question how high the resolution could practically go.

Small, high res, low light, and fast shutter speed are all competing against each other, and you usually have to at least compromise on one (or two) to do well with the others. If you're starting out with a very small lens, there's going to be a lot of compromise going on, which will greatly limit the number of applications you can use it in.

After WW1, the kings and queens in Europe saw their political power greatly reduced, and by the end of WW2 the few monarchies that survived had their monarchs limited to ceremonial duties, with real political authority being wielded by the countryâ(TM)s equivalent of a prime minister. The exceptions are microstates - Liechtenstein, Monaco, Vatican - the last one the only absolute monarchy left in Europe.

Not having children is the right choice considering what the world is now.

I recently read that the sales price is $105M but the lifetime maintenance cost is budgeted at $300M.

yeah, that's why SCOTUS was not given Judicial Review powers in the Constitution and just declared fifteen years later that it had that ultimate power "because we have to".

The Legislature is supposed to manage this nonsense. It has been in a coma since 1995.

I can see the argument that Nvidia has no obvious advantage in LLMs that would make them want to set up their own operation; it's basically everything else about the situation that would make me jumpy if I had bet on Nvidia.

"Investing $100 billion in OpenAI's spend $100 billion on Nvidia stuff initiative" sounds, at worst, like a slightly more legal version of the trick where you shuffle stock around between business units or stuff the channel and book that as sales because you suspect that your real sales numbers will disappoint; and, even if it's not quite that dire, Nvidia being willing to get paid in faith rather than in other people's money (or shift the stock to one of their customers that actually has money) looks very much like an indirect price cut, which gives the impression that either demand is outright softening, and Nvidia has units that it can't simply immediately shift to customers who are actually paying cash right now; or that Nvidia feels the need to help fill the gap between OpenAI's seemingly unlimited appetite for doubling-down money and the, sooner or later, limited supply of VC nose candy.

That said, it's not entirely novel; Nvidia's current holdings are something like 90% Coreweave(under 10% of Coreweave's total shares; but Coreweave shares are the bulk of other-company shares Nvidia holds); and they have an agreement with them obliging them to purchase any unused capacity through 2032; so they've been expressing confidence in AI-related companies and/or trying to keep the music going by paying some of their more fragile customers' bills even before this.

It could be that Nvidia isn't even trying to diversify; but the history of bad things happening when people underestimate correlated risks also doesn't make me feel great about the situation: Obviously it's going to be a bad day at Nvidia if 'AI' cools; stock price will take a hit and they will be left holding at least some inventory and TSMC and other vendor commitments; but it's going to be a worse day the more of their hardware they sold in exchange for stock in 'AI' Nvidia buyers, rather than in exchange for money, since the fortunes of those companies are going to be fairly closely correlated with Nvidia's own, albeit likely to swing harder and have further to fall.

Sooner or later, we'll run out of consultants. People eventually retire or quit the industry in disgust and the new crop of vibe coders certainly aren't going to fill those roles.

That matches my (limited) experience. Just for giggles, I let copilot (on Github) have a crack at a function in some of my code. Its suggested improvement made some sense in a vacuum, but in context it read more like someone who feels they must 'contribute' something and that's all they could find. It didn't seem to understand that the function would always be called in the context of a transaction and raising an exception will roll it back.

There is a difference. If you learned Pascal as the wave of the future, you could always do FORTRAN or with a little re-training, C (pointers always left Pascal programmers a bit befuddled at first). If you bet on Java, you could always migrate to C or Python. Some of the IDEs do leave people a bit brain dead, but not so much they can't make the jump to a simple text editor and command line compiler. Even BASIC was OK though you'd have to un-learn a few bad habits.

But if you learn 'vibe coding', you are dead in the water without the AI. No amount of typing "Make a game like Wolfenstein 3D but in a shopping mall with perfume ladies that take half of your health points.." into the compiler will get you anywhere at all.

loved that performance in Total Recall.

So this is where we're headed? Fail to pay them and they explode?

I get the unpleasant impression that we are doing a corporate reenactment of that period in European history where basically everyone was ruled by Habsburgs who were incestuous and incompetent in equal measure.

Given its small size it might be better to land a small mining module on the rock and then carve it up in situ to expand that module into a small space station.

We need to do this with the Taurus cluster to prevent another Tunguska event, but better to start small and practice closer. It's so much more profitable to not lift mass from Earth than it is to send it down.

Taurus has enough asteroids to build Space Station Alpha. Might be a nice vacation spot.

What if it's 299,792.458 km?

Do we send the SYN-ACK?

Perhaps more troublingly; they'll allow facebook to see what the people you see do.

My good-faith advice to anyone who is considering letting zuck into their refrigerator just to solve the crushing problem of what to cook with available ingredients or whatever would be "probably not worth it"; but that's ultimately a them problem one way or the other.

The trouble is that much of the pitch here is that you are supposed to provide footage as you wander around; merrily making the you problem everyone else's problem as you do so. And, yes, 'no expectation of privacy, etc, etc.' but there's a fairly obvious distinction between "in principle, it wouldn't be illegal to hire a PI to follow you around with a camera while you are in public", which involves a typically prohibitive cost in practice and "you paid them to upload geolocated footage, nice going asshole", where the economics of surveillance change pretty radically.

If people want to outource their thinking to facebook themselves I'd have to be feeling fairly paternalistic to intervene; but given that the normalization of these is, pretty explicitly, about facebook having eyes on everyone I can only hope that 'glasshole' continues to be a genuine social risk to any adopters.

Anyone who puts their money behind wildfire smoke as the leading public health threat of 2050 is just showing their abject lack of faith in the potential of malice and incompetence. Who are these faithless degenerates to tell us that we can't re-introduce enough trivially controllable infectious diseases or deregulate enough toxin smelters to outmatch some trees?