The 120kW figure is indeed input power. Thrust is typically quoted in Newtons, not Watts. The input power is useful because it's a proxy for thrust and vastly easier to measure. Ultimately, none of that really matters, however: the real figure of merit for ion engines (all rockets, really) is Specific Impulse. When NASA claims these use 90% less mass for the same total impulse, they're saying it's about one order of magnitude more propellant-efficient than a chemical rocket.

Who cares. This stuff is still in its infancy, and new algorithms and new hardware is going to collapse all of this to commodity level value anyhow. A few years from now you'll buy a GTP-5.x/Mythos equivalent in a box for gaming console money.

If you buy a platform from a company that once infected their customer's PCs with a rootkit, you deserve whatever Sony choses to inflict on you.

Enjoy.

I think they're doing well, given the givens. Panther Lake launched on time, and they're actually shipping in quantity. 18A is showing a typical yield ramp rate, getting to 60-75% (depending on who you read) yield now, and probably into 80-90% in 2026.

They're actually executing. Feel free to beat them over the head about past failed promises, if that makes you happy. 18A is a GAA + backside power design that this actually a bit ahead of the industry curve. They deserve some credit.

Musk understands he needs to jump start his fab: he doesn't care to take the time to build everything from scratch. This is a licensing deal that gets Musk into the fab business quickly. This is also good deal for Intel: it means Intel has brand new, well capitalized customer (see SpaceX IPO in 2026) that can help get 14A working. Intel captures all the Musk fab money, shutting out TSMC, Samsung, etc., and ends up with a working 14A node for its own markets. It also makes Intel look more credible to other 14A customers, being willing to collaborate on and sign deals with partners on fab tech.

While DRAM isn't exactly slow, SRAM access time is about one order of magnitude faster than DRAM. That's why it's used for CPU caches, TLBs, registers, etc. SRAM is more power efficient, as it doesn't need refresh. The downside is die area: an SRAM flip-flop bit much larger than a gate+cap DRAM bit.

SRAM has never been built at this scale, afaik. Cerebras was ahead of the curve here, building wafer scale SRAMs years ago. The penalties of DRAM (even with HBM) are now so severe that everyone is taking the gloves off and building mighty SRAMs. This has always been possible in theory, but the high cost never justified it.

The impact on semiconductor fab demand is significant. SRAM cells are larger than DRAM bits: more silicon die area for the same amount of RAM.

Also, the training vs. inference split Google is baking into actual hardware is a big deal: it's the reality that training and inference are very distinct things asserting itself, which has been obvious to anyone that hasn't been drinking excessive NVidia cool-aid: there is a future where costly, general purpose GPU-like devices aren't actually necessary for operating LLMs.

It's a click bait headline. This is a $10 billion option, not a $60 billion acquisition.

$10 billion is still on the insane side for a vscode extension. However, Elon has an AI platform, and that platform lacks the IDE integration that others have, so my guess is he's looking to plug that hole with money.

When you couple all that with the recent "Terafab" kickoff, it's clear Elon wants his whole AI compute stack under one roof; from the chips to the developer stack. He's building a vertically integrated AI platform.

He's doing all that because he's convinced solar powered space compute is the answer, and will make him billions. He's been right often enough that I'm not betting against it, but it's a big bet. He won't die a pauper either way, so why not?

Weasel words.

Cite your "evidence."

He played Jim Morrison in The Doors, for one, and actually sang the part himself. I'm sure you'll respond by panning that performance in defense of your question, but for probably 99% of people alive today, that performance is what is in their heads when they think of Jim Morrison, and they're not wrong.

He did his part to make Heat what it is, on a stage full of the biggest names Hollywood had at the time.

So, yeah. Pretty good, as they go.

That's beautiful. You should contact SAG-AFTRA and enlighten them as to your talent.

But you didn't actually answer the question. You expounded on the what actors do, but not why they should be protected. You offered no evidence that a generated character couldn't also do these things, and if so, why or how they might be prevented from doing so. Can you explain why an AI actor couldn't also adapt to different roles? I'm not aware of such a limitation.

The irony is pretty great here. Every member of the Kilmer estate would certainly have opposed such things while he lived, and we've seen that sentiment from living actors and their mouthpiece legion recently. Seeing a bankable actor getting AI'ed into a role for the first time will definitely have them howling from their coastal mansion roofs. But he's gone now, and can't earn those Hollywood big bucks as a living actor. Suddenly, the Kilmer estate is ready to sign off on AI Kilmer taking roles in movies! Weird huh?

Why? Is there some shortage of neckbeard commie forum warriors now?

That's entirely deliberate. The movie involves North American native characters, so we already know it's another hollywood scab picking exercise. If any meaningful plot were exposed in the trailer, that suspicion would only be confirmed.

Kind of a waste of an AI ghost. If you're going to authorize Val Kilmer for something, make it be the Heat sequel.

What? Expensive? Since when is expense a priority over Planet Saving? Just stop with your planet wrecking planes. This jet fuel supply problem is a good thing: think of all the CO2 particles Europe won't be emitting!

So? Isn't Europe full of planet saving trains, unlike stupid 'murika? What's the problem?