Six of one, half dozen the other.

This hasn't been around long enough to say one way or the other. Some it happened the first time they closed it, some it took a few. That batch could have simply exhibited the problem much earlier. If was that big of a difference to matter, and this is just a one-off, then their QC must have been asleep at the wheel to not notice a big variance like that.

I had an iphone 6, issued by my work at the time. It bent by simply keeping it in my front pocket, at a time when I wore loose fitting jeans, where most were experiencing that by having it in their back pocket. That is a failure marked by doing a 3 point bend test instead of a 4 point bend test, which had already been long-established for anything with non-uniform strength or density. After the first few returns, apple said "not a design defect, this is normal wear". Umm...ok... That phone was also infamous for battery failures. The same battery failures that they applied the infamous throttling patch for. The same battery failure that ultimately ended my particular phone, even though the problem started while the phone was still relatively new, and resulted in a bulging battery causing it to bend outwards, warping the outer bezel before apple said "ok, we'll replace your battery for a nominal fee" after the phone was already well past what materials scientists would refer to as its yield point.

Only phone I've ever had with any of these problems, and I carried a Nexus 5 in my pocket along with that phone, which was my personal phone. That Nexus 5 didn't bend, in fact it was helping that iphone last longer than it would have otherwise.

All it took for that to happen to you was a clown with an orange face.

That's not how mormons work. I'm an atheist raised in a mostly mormon community. You're made by apple, they're made by the book of mormon. Entirely different worlds. You are the scientology to their islam. Prophet has a new revelation, they get a new commandment. The revelation can be anything the prophet decides it is, even if it's incredibly stupid, like magic underwear. You drink coffee only if it comes in a container with an apple logo, Mitt Romney only drinks orange juice. If anything, the prophet tells the Utah republican party what to do.

That's accounting rather than finance, and I'm not an accountant either. Writedown is when an asset already on the ledger is worth less or has a lower recoverable value than what is currently recorded. The difference in value gets recorded as an expense. What you're thinking of is a write-off, i.e. zero value, not a write down.

While this wouldn't be an actual write down because it's not an asset on the books, my non-accountant mind treats it as a related concept. Basically, they're predicting future revenues may be lower than they had previously targeted. This is a forward looking statement, and generally where the finance side comes in. This is like when Facebook was predicting higher future revenue based on predicted mobile app usage growth, but then later announced that they hadn't quite figured out yet how to monetize advertising on the mobile app, but they were working on solving that problem. They eventually did and later realized those previously predicted targets. Meanwhile the stock took a pretty big hit.

At least, that's my interpretation.

I'm sure I'll get torn apart for this, but there are many cases where the AI mode does a significantly better job of searching, and is much more capable. Recent example:

Every week my son's school sends an email with a list of colleges visiting along with dates and times. My son wants to find schools with a degree in XYZ, which is a bit specialized. I type "Which of these schools have a degree in XYZ?" then hit paste. The AI parses the email (which is formatted for a human and includes irrelevant information about the visit), then produces a bulleted list, with links to the page for that specific degree. That would have taken me 10+ searches. And since each school calls the degree something slightly different, it would take even more.

No. The fundamentals haven't changed. Same with the Nvidia and SpaceX mentions. The stocks recovered in both cases. Usually the action here is to buy the dip and sell when it gets back to about where it was, but I'm not a finance guy and this is not financial advice.

The legitimate concern here is that this could (and IMO will) result in a long-term write down on assets long before they normally depreciate. And it probably will because these guys have been putting 5 year depreciation schedules on GPUs where it's normally 3 years.

Or they just test the candidates using something other than a coding challenge.

The only sane way to do it is with a service like Plaid that tightly (and deterministically) controls what all any automated systems can do. Plaid is also jointly owned by many of the banks raising a red flag here.

You always have been.

I'll quote your domestic partner:

What would you even do with money? I've already stumbled across you before -- you're that guy who lives behind the carl's jr dumpster. I almost peed on you last weekend when the diner was closed and there weren't any other bathrooms around. The only place to go was your domicile and I didn't notice you were even there until you rolled over in your sleep. If you did that only a second later, you'd have woken up wondering why you're all wet when it hasn't been raining.

Our system of checks and balances has so far proven to be pretty resilient. You guys come and go, but after 250 years you've never succeeded at killing millions through either direct executions or starvation, or both, and not for a lack of trying. In fact, you never even make it anywhere close. Which one were you part of, by the way? Were you a weatherman? The family? Or perhaps ALF? Either way, you guys were the most active when the soviets were at their peak.

Most of them are divers.

ICMP exists for a reason: It's useful. All of the header flags are. They have a purpose. They're not just there because somebody just felt like putting them there. They're not inherently insecure. There is no reason why "more people" should do that, unless, like you, they're all just fucking retarded. In fact, it's exceedingly rare there's *any* good reason to. This is me wearing both my cybersecurity engineer hat and my network engineer hat. The primary "good" reason to is counter-surveillance, which you don't even need most of the time, especially if you're already listening on very common service ports, which are far more useful for surveillance than sending an echo request, fiddling with TTL, etc. Especially on public networks, where the better tool is often just a looking glass.

If I'm red-teaming, I can do all of the probing I need without even using ICMP at all. More than likely I won't even reach for ICMP, because not only is it better to just look like normal traffic, ICMP generally tells me nothing about the software stack or the attack surface.

As I've already told you, repeatedly: Stay in poo lane. I'll let you know when there's a clogged toilet that you can drink clear.

instance*

Not at all. I know I'm better than you because instead of dedicating my life to what history shows is an ideology with a 100% failure rate and, based on that ideology, spending my days stewing on about people I don't even know simply because of arbitrary numbers I pulled out of my ass, I picked up hobbies. Two of these hobbies, namely computer security and software development, turned into a job. I didn't intend for that to happen, but it did anyway. People like you complain about how jobs like mine require an expensive degree, business/social connections, and belong to a certain age group, characteristics of which I have exactly none. No luck or anything like that required, just application. This job has lead to a few other hobbies, like scuba and building stuff in CAD before 3d printing it and adding circuitry.

Either way, you've chosen to define your life around what other people have, and you do not. So, you comfort yourself by calling yourself a rebel as if it makes your more outspoken insecurities not matter, even though you feel them all the same. All I'm doing is jamming my thumb into that sore spot every time you spout self-comforting nonsense, for the edutainmentz. You know what's more hilarious? The things your ideology tells you is virtuous, things like having a low carbon footprint, I'm also better than you at.

Conditions that happen with a wear-out can still happen early without. It's possible this flaw will show up more in real-world use as the device ages that didn't show up in lab conditions. For insurance, nobody is going to open and close that hinge in the same way, every single time, and they can close it in ways apple didn't test for. Hence the apple saying "you're bending it wrong" followed by Steve Jobs demonstrating, in front of a live audience, different failure modes of different devices that have nothing to do with neither apple nor the underlying problem.

Cheese...This whole time I literally thought token maxing meant getting the most bang for your tokens. No joke. I never bothered reading anything about it because nothing about my job ever said "use no more than x tokens" and nobody ever said I was using too many. The work objectives have always been the deliverable, not how we delivered it. The only restriction we have is the obvious: Sandbox it, and don't just give it everything.