Again, you ironically describe yourself. As shown below.

That is your false recollection. What I actually wrote in my first post was: "Chinese AI is handicapped by training that has to conform with Chinese Communist Party doctrine and revisionist history." It was not about your downloadable strawmen that you introduced later.

Again, psychological projection. The straw man is the local "modest" models you introduce. That is the goal post move here.

You left off the relevant "their own internet", a reference to the Great Firewall, which I refer to.

Which is a reference to the Great Firewall, and the AI that will integrate with it. Ie the remote frontier-scale models.

All you have done is document your misunderstanding. Your tangential strawman of local "modest" models.

We already have relatively low power devices that essentially cool via IR radiation.

SpaceX is not rewriting the rules of physics. They are rewriting the rules of engineering.

Actually highly competent people are arguing against space based data centers as an alternative to ground based. There will be AI processing in orbit, but it will generally be for local in orbit needs.

Getting reusable rockets to land on their tail, turning the decades old sci-fi into reality, was a matter of engineering. The difficulty of cooling in space is a matter of physics.

SpaceX's cost effectiveness is largely through reusability. Again, an engineering based solution. If and when we engineer AI processors that do not generate much heat, they will be easier to build and locate on earth. AI in orbit will largely remain for orbital needs, not ground based needs.

I'd like to emphasize that what we put up there will probably be processing data that is acquired up there. I expect for an application that that does not want the lag of low orbit to ground communications.

With respect to AI processing in space its more about local processing, local decision making, faster response times. It for much more focused and limited work. Not the high volume general purpose work a ground based data center would perform.

BA or BS does not indicate the level of sophistication of the material taught. It simply indicates the curriculum focus. To generalize. A BA perhaps providing a conceptual understanding of the science, a BS adding a practical application of the science. BA programs are more about breadth, BS more about focus.

Or maybe it only requires a junior high school level of science, understanding heat conduction and that space offers little of that. That a ground based data center that effectively needs a river for cooling and a space based AI platform being different as a result.

I expect the AI work done in orbit will be much more specialized. Smaller scale and less cooling demands.
There is radiative cooling in the sense of IR emissions. It more a lack of conduction, heat transfer through physical contact.

CPUID instruction not CPUID utility, mode 3 ?, 96 bits spread across various registers. It's a legacy instruction, no longer returning a unique serial number on the Intel side. And I assume the AMD side as well.

Some folks are claiming that there is some sort of unique value associated with DRM functionality. But I'm not sure if that is coming from the CPU or the motherboard.

I would only be mildly surprised if a CPU returns a random number these days, hence not a unique serial number, but something a developer might consider close enough. Personally I would have guessed they returned 0 or -1 when they decided to remove unique serials.

Exactly, that is what you do.

Exactly, that is what you do.

Other than the posts above that show the true origin of the conversation, a bit different than you claimed.

No, it seems that Apple is requiring the user to explicitly allow agents to have access. For example the new version of Xcode has the ability to be controlled by an AI agent. First time I ran the new version it asked if I wanted to allow agents to use Xcode. The options were always, only when Xcode is already running, never.

Don't worry, it's not. MacOS already requires that a user give explicit permission to an app that wants full disk access. It kind of sounds like Apple is going to have greater granularity than the current options of your app's writable folder and everything.

I had an employer that was in the University's on-campus research park. Part of the deal to be in the park was to interact with the university and students. Besides the typical internship stuff, we also had company research projects actually handed off to student teams. Some degree programs, for example business, have group projects where you are supposed to do something in collaboration with a local company. Our company project was to research a potential a new product, we coordinated with the school of business at the university and one of the student teams in the new product development class used our company project as their class project. We were expected to have this sort of cooperation since we were in the research park.

Doing something in coordination with a company does not mean you are not properly pursuing academic goals. Yeah, its Microsoft, but from the summary it didn't sound too strange other than the normal spokesperson word salad.

What an amazing bit of projection you have there.

And yet another bad guess on your part regarding Trump. Hint: Being critical of the CCP is a quite bipartisan endeavor.

That is surely what the other lawyer would offer as a counterargument. I would also expect that there is something about hardware based bans in the terms of service, which the buyer would have to agree to in order to access the online game.