Probably everybody suspects that AI is a bubble that will end and would be hesitant to force Apple to look elsewhere. Elsewhere includes building their own fabs... they don't do this because the margins aren't big enough, but if prices rise, they might and existing fabs will lose Apple as a customer forever. Apple is one of the few companies that would really be capable of pulling off something like that. Vertical integration is their specialty - why not a little higher? The ones with the fabs likely know this, or are at least a bit afraid of it.
OK, so they make their own fabs. Aren't the components in short supply? Aren't they paying more for ASML machines?...etching chemicals?...high-end silicon? It's like the Strait of Hormuz closing...the USA is now an oil exporter, so we're not impacted, right?...nope!!!...because everyone who is impacted is now buying from the USA and our gas prices went up nearly as much as everyone else's. OK, so Apple can make their own chips?....what's to stop them from jacking up the price since the market is willing to pay? They make more money, but they're not going to be virtuous and underprice their machines in a market that's willing to pay far more than they should.
This isn't just AI. Since launch $100 would be accounted for due to inflation alone. Add to that Trump's tariff war which would have added over $100, and then add AI on top of that, and AI looks like the least of the actual contribution to price rise (it's not, to be clear AI = bad and hardware prices are out of control).
Also reminder that there's no connection between hardware price, and time in the console war. Consoles have never been priced according to hardware prices as (other than Nintendo) everyone else produced them as a loss leader to sell games.
If you were correct, then this wouldn't apply to laptops and open-market RAM and storage. Consoles are not the concern...the fact that I have to pay a fuckton extra for SSDs and RAM and devices of all sort, even those not subsidized as a loss-leader, is the concern. I don't even want a PS5, but this does apply to everything I do want to buy in the next year that draws electricity.
This is a problem, well-documented, by the fact that the major AI vendors are buying all they can...it's a basic market problem. The only solution is to let the horrid bubble pop. My frustration is that they're subsidizing it in a circular manner and hiding from everyone how horrid their business model is.
LLM AIs will outlive this hype cycle and all the destruction they're causing. AI is here to stay. I just am sick of suffering because the major vendors are lying to investors and lying to their customers about both their business model and the capabilities of their technology.
For this price, I can buy a Mac and go into Mac gaming...
Chips are not only more expensive, their supply is unstable and unreliable. It impacts everyone who buys computer components. Apple has more leverage than Sony, but trust me, you'll see the same level of price increases from Apple, probably this year and every year until this horrible AI bubble pops. It's fucking surreal to want to buy devices early to save money. All my life...you wait to buy something, it goes down in price and gets better. Now we just pay more for the exact same performance every year.
Why can't they watch porn though? What's going to happen? Is it going to scar them, give them brain cancer? The only argument I can see is that it will give them an unrealistic view of sex, which is true, but that can be raised against every single piece of fiction, especially fiction that is explicitly targeting children which tends to give them an entirely inaccurate view of how things work.
I don't know the answer to that, TBH. The experts say it's bad. It's illegal...so I tell them they need to follow the law. I don't think a 10yo and 12yo should be picking and choosing which laws the follow or don't follow. Generally, when I don't know the answer, I defer to experts....I also just don't care enough to follow up. Life is just fine if they do normal kid stuff rather than goon to the worst the internet has to offer.
I think it's probably better for them to not have their developing brains saturated with porn designed to stimulate jaded 30-something sex addicts. For example, step-sibling, choking, anilingus, calling each other "mommy" and "daddy"...that kind of stuff...I'm old, so for me, I grabbed every porn I could find when I was underage, but it was typical 80s stuff: hot women with huge hair doing very conventional sex stuff. The most extreme thing I saw until the 2000s was fake tits. I don't think it harmed me at all. But again, the porn of the 80s was quite tame. The 70s porn was downright wholesome!...all natural.
While I may fully grasp the intent of that specific law, I think it's a reasonable restriction. Also, life is just easier when you demand your kids follow the law..."Sorry buddy, I'm not the one saying you can't look at those titties....it's the federal government! Blame Donald Trump...he could let you see them, but he doesn't want you to!"
But now that under Trump, the USA is stepping back...
I'll have some of what this guy is smoking.
The USA used to be a reliable protector for it's allies. Trump has changed that...in my mind, for the worse...but history will tell. Like I said...shit was horrible when the USA was looming?...OK, well, you'll soon see what life is like when the USA loses interest in your region. The CIA has done shitty things in the Middle East, but let's see how shitty they get once the USA doesn't really give a shit because we have enough oil and Trump doesn't respect alliances....especially since hypersonic missiles now cost the same as a luxury car.
"We apparently live in a world where a bot writing down sexy stories is a bigger concern than blatant bait-and-switch."
Yeah, it is. When/if you reproduce your priorities will change.
I have 2 kids. We've had many conversations about sex. I've told them they're not allowed to watch porn or consume inappropriate content. However, I also educate them as to why they should wait until they're 18 and frankly, when they want to talk about sex, I make it a boring academic discussion about science and reproduction...so instead of "ooh nice titties"...the conversation goes to lactation and hormones produced and how babies rely on mother's milk during their early years. Sex isn't naughty or scary. When they ask me inappropriate questions, like "how often do you and mommy have sex?"...while it's tempting to remind them there's a lock on the door for a reason....I just politely tell them that's personal information and I don't want to share it. My strategy is to make sex clinical and educational, not naughty.
Both of my pre-teen kids have watched porn without our permission before and had questions. I told them they cannot do that again, but I went through and explained every detail. That naughty cumshot? I explained about the different organs in the male anatomy and the different fluids produced and their purpose and framed things from the perspective of people starting families...which is easier for them to understand. However, I didn't shame them. I'm honestly glad they saw it because then I don't have to explain to them what ejaculation is. Both of them feel very comfortable asking me questions and ask me a lot of them (my wife is less comfortable, but really appreciates how I answer it and how much sex ed trivia I remember).
So rather than let the internet and their friends be their sole source of information, I've set up an environment where they know they can trust me and ask me whatever and I'll never shame them. I prepare my children for the world we live in, not demand the world change so I don't have to teach them what sex is.
But to the point, sex is like traffic. We teach our kids to look both ways before they cross the street. We teach drivers to be mindful of pedestrians, especially children. We don't go around banning cars to nerf the world for our children.
This seems like a great area for this technology. Isn't it the feminist and the evangelicals that both say porn is bad and that it prey's upon vulnerable women? With the use of this technology, no people need be harmed from working in the industry. This enables folks to still consume the content but without people having to do the performances.
I'm more a freedom type person. If people want to do sex work for a living, why not? So long as it's regulated like every other industry and the workers taxed on the income, what's the problem? I'm sure many folks would be quite frustrated at losing this job opportunity.
The extremist in the conversation would do away with all sexual material and work while the rest of us can see the grey area and at the end of the day, shouldn't adults be allowed to make their own choices for themselves?
Porn is irrelevant to feminism. People who oppose legal porn for non-religious reasons have issues with sex....no other reason. It's like drinking. I don't like to drink, some do. However, I don't go around claiming people who enjoy drinking legally are harming women because I am uncomfortable around drunk assholes. I just accept they're into something I find disgusting and not good for me, personally. Porn is a profession with a market. It's no more degrading than driving an uber or cleaning someone's toilet....but often more lucrative. However, as you've stated, there is no problem. It's a fucking job, or more likely, a side hustle. Some jobs suck, some are awesome. To me, sex performers are like any other performers...being a struggling musician seems like a worse life than showing your tits on OnlyFans, IMHO. However, it's a valid line of work providing a service than harms no one. Women who claim porn is sexist are trying to control others.
Porn is often pretty gross to many people. That's OK. It's not for you. Most of the hit songs on the radio are gross to me. Every major religion is gross to me. I don't go around telling everyone we need to ban annoying pop music or religion. I don't even shame people who are into it. I'm happy they find their joy so long as they don't harm me or try to make me partake in their gross behavior.
The massive problem with the Feminist movement is that it isn't official. Anyone can claim to be a feminist and we have a bad habit as a society of taking them seriously. In contrast, Catholicism has well defined doctrines. Someone can't go around applying their personal prejudices based on being a Catholic...they can't say "Fat chicks are gross and heretical to the Catholic Church"...you could ask any priest and they'll quickly tell you that person is full of shit and doesn't speak for them.
Unfortunately, because feminism is an idea, not a specific movement, there is no authority to say what is feminist and what isn't. So you're some awful misandrist who blames men for all your failings in life?...and I know a LOT of women like that. You can go around and call yourself a feminist. You can say you speak on behalf of feminists...and everything that irks your personal prejudices...like women more attractive than you monetizing their bodies and receiving adoration you will never receive is sexist and anti-women.
And my tribe, the liberals, have a VERY BAD habit of not questioning people that speak for them. So many are too afraid to be called sexist, so it's easier to just let Andrea Dworkin, Catharine MacKinnon, Gail Dines, Susan Brownmiller, etc rant and say absurd bullshit like "Porn is rape"..."All performers were coerced into performing (which is technically rape)"...and Brownmiller's famous "porn is practice for violence against women." None of these horrible people bothered to talk to the performers. Dworkin was ABSOLUTELY nuts and thought marriage was rape...all men are rapists...all bi/heterosexual women are anti-feminist traitors, etc.
Liberals let female incels define a major wing of feminism because they didn't have the common sense to question their obvious bullshit. Few would let Andrew Tate speak for the male gender....yet Andrea Dworkin's obviously stupid bullshit is taught in universities...not as being actually correct, just as being an alternate idea.
And their worst nightmare has come true. Porn is legal. Porn is VERY prevalent. EVERYONE enjoys porn. Guess what....violence against women is down...rape is down. Misogyny is down since everything they wrote. Why?...PORN HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PROBLEMS WOMEN FACE!!!!! The crimes against women had a lot more in common with crime, in general, which has stronger roots in socio-economic issues. Turns out the way to reduce rape is to same way to reduce robbery and murder...don't ban the porn, but increase economic opportunity....provide substance abuse treatment...lock up the mentally ill with criminal intent that can't function in society.
I'd much rather be a civilian in a nation attacked by Israel than Iran.
I could have given it to you if you'd said the US, but Israel is literally committing genocide in Gaza.
"Genocide is the deliberate, systematic destruction—in whole or in part—of a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group". Israel is not targeting civilians, but terrorist organizations. The point of genocide is to target the people, not the combatants. Are they committing atrocities?...maybe, but that's not genocide. Words mean things. Also, that's not the correct use of the world "literal"
Is Israel the good guy?...in my mind, yes, but I am not confident of that and I am open that maybe I'm wrong.
However, what I am very confident about is that Iran is far worse. They do target civilians. They fund groups that target civilians. The only reason Iran isn't committing LITERAL genocide against the Israelis and probably most of the Sunnis is because they lack the ability, not because they're more ethical.
You're comparing nations against your ideals, not reality and their peers. Israel spend a fortune trying to precisely attack specific targets. Iran has no qualms about killing non-combatants. That's a major difference between a democracy and an authoritarian theocratic regime. Again, I'd rather be a civilian living in a nation attacked by Israel than Russia or Iran. No one WANTS to be attacked, obviously, but at least civilized nations make the effort to do the right thing. They fail often...and that's the horrors of war...but the uncivilized ones? Nope...Russia will happily bomb daycares, schools, and civilian powerplants to simply weaken the resolve of their opponents. If Iran has the ability to, they'd do the same. I have no doubt about that.
Have you ever been to the bases in San Diego (or anywhere, for that matter?) They have plenty of civilian facilities. Schools, daycares, hospitals, you name it, they got it. Any attack on a military target on US soil would be treated by the US as an attack on a civilian target.
The USA wants your missiles to go to military targets, so we can either intercept them or handle the damage. We don't want them hitting daycares. So we want accuracy from our adversaries. If anything, it's easier to intercept. But we're not Russia. We'd rather see our soldiers die than babies.
On the other hand, bombing schools and hospitals seems to be a specialty of USrael. No annoying air defense to get in the way.
You can say whatever you want in a vacuum, but you have to compare superpowers to superpowers. I'd much rather be a civilian in a nation attacked by Israel than Iran. At least with the USA and Israel, civilian casualties are a mistake. With Russia, it's part of their plan. They intentionally bomb civilian infrastructure targets. Iran endorses terrorism and killing of civilians and funds groups to do so...on a scale that civilized nations cannot match....so again...pull your head out of your ass.
Nations need to be judged compared to PEER nations, not in isolation.
Time is nature's way of making sure that everything doesn't happen at once. Space is nature's way of making sure that everything doesn't happen to you.