They use TSMC and Samsung, so South Korea, Taiwan, or, theoretically, the US.
Components sourced from U.S. and allied-country suppliers account for more than 90% of the BlueChip prototypes’ component procurement cost.
Both South Korea and Taiwan are US allies.
The more interesting question is what are the 10% that they aren't sourcing from allies?
Apple uses on-device AI for lots of things that are not chatbots. Video, audio and image processing can be computationally intensive with fairly small models.
* by "airgapped" we mean we asked it pretty please to only use the wifi.
What I've heard is a market cap well north of a trillion dollars is expected.
Yes. As I said, market cap or "valued at" doesn't mean that's how much money people put in.
It is losing money combined with being a commodity + rapid obsolescence that seems strange to me.
Then don't buy shares. Anthropic is making an offer, which you can accept, or not. I certainly won't be. There are lots of good general reasons why you should never buy an IPO, especially as an individual investor. I'm not sure what's strange about it though. Lots of successful companies deal in commodities, including perishable ones, from whoever you buy your food from to Facebook and Microsoft.
Billions, not trillions. Two trillion is what you get when you multiply the hypothetical share price by the number of shares. They'll just sell a small fraction of them.
And yes, people do it all the time. Notable examples include Amazon, Uber, etc. Most American companies are not profitable at IPO:
New trend? The venture capital business model has always been to fund startups, bring the rare successful one to IPO and then cash out.
I'm addressing the larger over-reliance on homework, that's why the reference to children.
You're trying to talk about a general problem by using language specific to a subset that is not under discussion. Yeah, sure.
It's for practice. Using homework for testing has always been a mediocre to dumb idea.
Hey, Nancy Reagan, glad to see you're still around!
I guess the old war on drugs thing was getting old so it's time for the new boogeyman?
It's amazing to me that with access to the world's knowledge people will just write shit, then, when corrected, insist on it, without bothering to check. Anonymity is a powerful thing I guess.
Here, I copied the link to the Artemis program outline for you:
Yes, they do. The HLS might take people from lunar orbit to the surface and back. They've still got to get to lunar orbit, and that uses an expensive SLS launch.
Even using Starship, it's unclear how much it would cost to launch from Earth to the moon. A lot more than it would seem from the mass to LEO numbers for sure. A hell of a lot of refuelling launches are required, including refuelling in lunar orbit, which means those tankers need their own LEO refuelling.
Likewise, the potential contract with Blue Origin is for the lander, not the whole mission. New Glenn isn't big enough, although the upgraded version they're talking about is getting closer. It doesn't exist yet though.
Neither Starship nor New Glenn are human rated and Starship especially isn't likely to be any time soon. Not good for racing.
"Our frontier models somehow got access to the internet and hacked a bunch of things, these things are unstoppable, sorry! Btw IPO soon"
"Our vast experience has taught us that giving our models access to the internet and telling them to hack stuff is a bad idea so we won't be doing that anymore. We look forward to everyone else following our industry leading best practices."
Except with some "humility" thrown in, and more linkedin cheese.
China is a communist dictatorship and can therefore barely feed its people, only has technology it's stolen, and is therefore hopelessly behind.
Also China is the greatest existential threat in the world and we must all spend 5% of our GDP on the military (I assume, because Russia is our friend now?), race them to the moon, and cease using all advanced Chinese technology immediately.
NASA isn't using Starship or Falcon, they're using SLS. SLS is less efficient than the Saturn V in $/kg to lunar orbit and it's also only about 2/3 as capable.
The question was about sea level rise.
If the rising waters coincide with other climatic events, such as rainstorms and high tides, the phenomenon could swallow beaches, chew away bluffs and coastlines
There is a narrative that oh, a few cm of sea level rise is no problem, it's just a little higher water. It isn't.
However, the kinds of multi-million-dollar mansions that celebrities buy aren't the rickety perched-on-the-edge-of-a-crumbling bluff houses built in the 30s and 40s. They tend to be built-by-high-priced-architects homes that had civil engineers to advise about the stability of the foundation.
Disobedience: The silver lining to the cloud of servitude. -- Ambrose Bierce
