Well, it needs to move its flaps. Those flaps are roughly 150 square meters, each. It needs to be able to move them against a hypersonic airstream. Imagine trying to push 150 square meters into a mach 25 airstream, and I imagine you'll figure out where the power draw comes from.

Construction sites do use a lot, but not enough to drain an entire reservoir. Otherwise theyâ(TM)d change themselves into either the source of a small river, or a reservoir in themselves.

Thatâ(TM)s why the towns need to get serious with âoeoh, you built it anyway? Thatâ(TM)s great, weâ(TM)re confiscating everything on the land, including all those GPUs, and youâ(TM)ll be billed for demolishing the building.â

IN SECRET!

You mean... it wrote the files it needs to implement its features to disk, just like every single other feature they add?

I installed software, and it wrote files to my disk WITHOUT ASKING!!!!!!!!!

No dummy, that's what "install" means.

Accounting years are not necessarily the same as calendar years. H1 2026 according to Asus' accountants may well be November 2025-April 2026.

I mean, given how good clod clod is at writing code, it wouldnâ(TM)t surprise me if it also helped fix them.

Well, up until now, robots havenâ(TM)t been faster than humans at this task. In fact, robots have been catastrophically bad at it. Itâ(TM)s a demonstration that bipedal robot technology is advancing rapidly.

I think you could probably make a convincing argument that what software you choose to make is protected speech, and that this law is unconstitutional.

Plus, with klipper, itâ(TM)d be even worse to implement. The pi attached to do the bulk of the processing is optional - the actual printer is the low power bit that does nothing but move the print head. Effectively this would ban klipper entirely, because the printer side MCU stands no chance of verifying a part.

Can you give an example of where it gives bullshit results? In general it seems to align pretty well with general overall chip performance. Obviously itâ(TM)s not going to give you performance for a specific task, but it does seem to correlate pretty well with overall system performance.

I think itâ(TM)s easily explained. Most people on slashdot are early tech adopters. When ChatGPT 3.5 burst onto the scene, they tried it. They tried using it to generate code, and they got laughable results. Theyâ(TM)re now convinced that AIs generate terrible code because theyâ(TM)ve not since gone back and given any reasonably recent Claude a go.

Geekbench runsâ¦

- clang
- gz
- WebKit
- pdfium (chromeâ(TM)s pdf renderer)
- mobile net (a commonly used open image classifier)
- grep
- sqlite
- astc
- bc7
- dxtc
- DeepLab
- content aware image resizing

Almost every single test it runs is a commonly used open source bit of software, and those that arenâ(TM)t are implementations of commonly used algorithms. I honestly have no idea where the idea that âoegeekbench doesnâ(TM)t have realistic testsâ came from, but itâ(TM)s bullshit. Is it going to accurately model *your* mixture of tasks - no. But are the tasks it chooses a reasonably representative sample of things people do with computers? Absolutely.

To be fair, Appleâ(TM)s RAM prices are atm lower than PC RAM prices, but I acknowledge that we live in interesting times.

The really neat trick is to run Linux in Appleâ(TM)s virtualisation framework, and then install the libraries that let you call into Rosetta whenever a process needs x86.