Intel plans to move Panther Lake's compute tile in-house (assuming they can get yields under control), but the rest of the active silicon (graphics tile, SoC tile, I/O tile), which I believe represents the majority of the die space, will still be TSMC.

Intel's given confusing statements about this in the past because when they cite what percentage of the total die area they manufactured versus TSMC, they include the area of the interposer underneath all the tiles in their column, which is silly. Arrow Lake (the predecessor to Panther Lake) is 100% manufactured by TSMC (all active silicon), but Intel claimed that they made more than half the chip, just because they put all the TSMC tiles on an Intel interposer.

If you want to run an 80GB model, a 48GB laptop will not run it, a 128GB APU will, and the rest of the comparison is irrelevant.

Also see the PNAS article referenced; "The entities enabling scientific fraud at scale are large, resilient, and growing rapidly" : https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/...

Or you can buy a Framework Desktop with 128GB of unified memory for $2,895.

The history file should have shown an explanation for the deletion?

I agree with you.

A "conspiracy" is when more than one person works together on some action. Possibly the word should not apply unless they make an effort to hide the fact that they are doing the action. But it is going to cover a lot of stuff like business dealings and arranging a surprise birthday party.

A "conspiracy theory" is somebody claiming there is a conspiracy without any proof. May also require that they not be a member of the conspiracy, somebody claiming they are part of a conspiracy but lying should have some other term.

I think I misread the initial posts, the person talking about 9-11 was complaining about the same thing, you need the word "theory" to split real conspiracies from ones that may not exist. Initial poster was claiming you should never use the word "theory".

Ì did not "go there", I described what I think will happen if we do nothing and just let the current system evolve naturally. Plenty of ideas for other systems, from a full blown planned economy, to the current system with a UBI, different ways to levy taxes to pay for that, and so on. And like you, I am pessimistic about it happening. But not because people cannot fathom another system, or even that people wouldn't be able to agree on a system. The problem is that one way or the other, the "haves" are going to have to give something up, and not just the super rich, but the upper middle class as well. That makes it very unlikely to happen.

Well, it did pass lots of loopholes with flying colors.

Did. The pressurized space part of the Deepsea Challenger (as of the Trieste before her -- does English also use she for submarines?) was a pressure sphere at the bottom of the vessel.

You're confusing the whole submarine including her outer shell and couple of tons of non-pressuized technical equipement, with the tiny pressure sphere within her where James Cameron sat.
See diagrams on her wikipedia page.

I think the confusion is due to the fact that the pressure sphere is embed within the hull of the vessel and not very visible, whereas on the Trieste it was clearly distinct and attached under the hull.

Possible? Probably.
Easy? Even less than when using spheres.
Economically feasible? It's definitely not cheap given the failed attempt of proving the opposite by Titan.

Academics are assessed by the number of papers they publish, [...] Cambridge v Deadwood Community College

By the way... Cambridge is based in the UK, which is evaluated under the rules of the REF, where broadly speaking you get to submit your best 4 papers over the last 5 years. This is not without its problems, but it's better than misplay spamming the world with infinite papers.

As you say, Goodhart's law always applies and there are both interesting and awful ways of gaming the REF which is of course now a national sport among university administrators. And the 5 year time window is too short etc etc etc

So your conclusion about there being fake scientists publishing fake research is that we have too many real ones?

Too many for what?

To the contrary, it took literally thousands of years before works of fiction stopped purporting to be "this really happened." As late as the 18th century, many of the novels in English still pretended to being nonfiction. (And not to mention, of course, stuff like A Million little Pieces and Go Ask Alice.)

The difference is, works of Large Language Models (often called "AI") are mish-mashes of the work of actual humans, with no actual human content.

Not sure why this is marked "troll"... it's a fair question. The main ways we have to distribute wealth is through labour, and return on venture capital. If labour is no longer a viable method because a large majority of people won't be wanted for work anymore, and we keep the system as is, then you end up with a massive welfare system that is inevitably going to collapse, while people living off return on investments will continue to do well until economic collapse follows, with no middle class to prop it up.

Given that sentence I might presume you mixed up and meant to say the "F" (capacitance) is the better buy over the "M" (membrane) on the grounds of "more longevity"?

Also:

Correct me if I am wrong, but the original PC shipped with a type F, right? The membrane type M came later as a cost-reduction, right?
(So you basically managed to kill the F tank with your typing :-D )

So I guess, you're not the kind of guy who adds after-market solenoids for extra "oomph"! XD

From what I've been checking the project, it seems to me that:
- What eventually disappears is old stock from previous iterations of the project (e.g. the square machined case, before the current cast one) and small side projects (the split keyboard, the extra numpads, etc.) if all you want is to "get a model F", there's regularly something
- I am under the impression that the guy over plays a bit the "take them while they are still here!" marketing strategy.