Well also that and that valuation i predicated on growth that' physically impossible.

AI companies have started talking about "GW" of installations which makes it simpler to analyze. The electricity capacity doesn't exist to meet the growth predictions. The manufacturing capacity doesn't exist to manufacture the generation capacity required to meet growth predictions. The capacity to build manufacturing facilities to match predictions doesn't exit.

The market has gone irrational because there's no way growth can match predictions. I ain't shorting though because Keynes isn't wrong.

I expect any other irrationality will also bite hard. Claude is pretty good, really. Not, like, perfect and AI will destroy the world and programmers, but the genie is out of the bottle here, something like it is here to stay. It's too useful. But let's say OpenAI stumble and suddenly their terrifying outgoings slightly tip over and they go very broke very fast, well, the market will panic and go omgomgomgomgAIisbadactually!!!111onelelevne and the entire thing, Anthropic included, will crash through the floor, even though people will, for example, still be spending a lot on Anthropic.

Where's the part of small government, freedom, free market, don't tread on me now?

Right there in power, it was all lies and a branding exercise. The right have never held to those beliefs, but it turns out that a lie repeated often enough becomes the truth for enough people that they can get into power.

But you know "both ides" so I voted for the worst. How come on one ever says "both sides" so I voted for Harris?

HP 4%, etc.

Well HP had the genius idea of putting a 8723409821E+27% markup on printer ink while selling the printers at a loss to bring in customers. Unfortunately they also forgot to not make their printers so shit that they self destruct before HP make enough back on the ludicrously overpriced ink.

It's like the shittines doubles for the customer, but somehow cancels out on HP's end.

Fuck HP. Also Apple, can't stand those fuckers (shame their CPU is so good), but also and especially and for ever fuck HP.

Either you posted AI slop or you've been reading so much that you've tarted to ape chat GPT's style.

Anyone who doesn't think it's impressive can go hand in their engineer card at the door.

This feels a bit like a distinction without a difference?

Development feeds into distribution however you do it, so, at some point you have to deal with that.

Besides, pypi is more of a package distribution system than a software development system.

So you agree you are being an idiot?

No I'm agreeing that you're a moron.

Do you need a working EUV mahine in order to build your first EUV machine?

Yes or No. Simple question. The GGGGP was saying you do not.

That is what you appear to be disputing and I agree with you that you are being an idiot for disputing it.

All you have is someone saying it is true.

Is that what you think? You really fail at reading. He's talking about making 2nm fabs not making 2nm chips.

What does "drive better than humans" mean? Drive better in all possible scenarios? That's likely impossible now and probably forever. Maybe driver better in a majority of scenarios weighted by occurrence probability? Maybe, but we don't currently have the technology to validate this requirement.

Indeed it's interesting!

There are obviously mistakes that SDCs will make that humans never will (ignoring sci-fi shit, I'm talking about the current state of the art), and things they'll be worse at.

There's also mistakes they won't make: they never get tired, impatient or angry. They never turn around to yell at (or beat, yep I've seen that) their kids while driving. Being more widely trained they won't lack experience driving with a find misting of unexpected liquid on the roads (hi LA you suck at driving in the rain) etc. They won't text. Won't try to punish other road users. Won't get drunk or high. And so on. Well they shouldn't. If SDC companies think they can skirt or edge over the law to get a competitive advantage they will, and now you'll have law breaking at scale (well kinda like regular drivers!).

And they can (Waymo, not Tesla) have superhuman senses, e.g. lidar and radar.

But... well it can be measured to an extent: you can measure deaths per billion km, and see if SDCs do better or worse. Though that can hide a lot of things. For example if they are utterly unable to cope with unexpected situations and stall blocking the roads, then deaths caused by blocked emergency services won't be attributed correctly to them.

Certainly any comparison to the worst drivers is useless.

Depends: I would assume (though common sense often isn't so YMMV) that the worst drivers are responsible for a much higher proportion of problems than the best. So let's say the SDC apocalypse eliminate the worst X% of drivers, but also flatten the best 100-X% down to X. I'd imagine that there is some value of X where this is a net improvement.

Question is what is X. Probably middleish I'd imagine since the worst X% do the most damage.

But of course also SDCs will always make different mistakes which makes it hard to evaluate because the X% level SDC won't really be like an X% level human.

I don't think the cherry picked examples of "SDC does something dumbass" because (e.g. in the UK, where we have some of the safest roads in the world) 1600 people die per year due to motor vehicle collisions a substantial number of those are due to utterly fucking stupid people (nearly 50% are alcohol related).

It's an interesting question. That of course centres around the mechanics of SDCs driving compared to humans. There are likely to be other damaging failure modes when you have 3 companies controlling almost all cars, where for example certain kinds of traffic management become impossible because getting google to agree to code for it is impossible and they somehow won't pay fines. Or you might have the "cruise forever if you can't find a parking spot" button which will will make traffic even worse because the roads are free to use and there'll be a mechanism to abuse free resources for personal gain even further.

This seems like essentially a variant of the Waluigi effect hypothesized here https://www.lesswrong.com/post... which had the advantage of a pretty fun name for the situation, and is worth reading

I've not seen that before. It was an interesting read.

Huh I agree with you, pretty strongly, about something!

Personally I think the right to privacy stuff is a little broken. It was fine to have no particular expectation of privacy in a public place because when those laws were written the only practical way to violate it was to have 1 person essentially stalking one other, and that doesn't scale. It's really expensive, so a few people might have their privacy violated in an unreasonable way but as a population it was fine.

We now have the tech to scale cheaply, so a well funded organisation can follow huge numbers of people all the time.

Depending on your views of private corporations, that may or may not be acceptable.

However, the temptation for the government is always too great here, and if that data is available they will use it legally or not. I think the only way to stop them is to make it much harder for companies to do panopticon surveillance in the first place.

That is the most idiotic question I have ever heard.

Look in the mirror, bro.

The GGGP stated you don't need a working EUV machine in order to build an EUV machine and you have been arguing that point for like 5 posts now.

GGGP> You dont need 2nm tech to make 2nm tech.
YOU> Citation Needed.

also you:
"That's idiotic".

Yes. I 100% agree it is idiotic.

What are you talking about?

It's a simple question. Did ASML need a working EUV machine in order to build an EUV machine?

The answer is obviously no. I don't really get why you are arguing this.

Gender is real as long as you mean it as equivalent of biological sex.

It' always good when you're arguing the brain doesn't exist. But even if we ignore that, I bet you can't even give a foolproof definition of "biological sex".

The problem is the simplified thinking that an EUV machine is just an iteration of a DUV machine and not knowing the leap in technology between the two.

Either way you don't need a working EUV machine in order to make an EUV machine.

Can you point me to a single biology class today studies why angry people have such strong yet inaccurate opinions on gender and studies thereof?

Astrology, voodoo and divination are all things that aren't real.

Are you saying gender isn't real? That's a rather extreme position I must say. Maybe someone should study why people like you adopt such extreme views on gender and why any discussion of such things makes them so angry. We could name the course "Study about gender" or something like that.