Oracle has poured money into AI. Into the datacenter side even, you know the side the hyperscalers who don't make a profit selling to the AI model companies who lose money selling the use of their models for less than it costs them to run them so those customers can also lose money.

It is everything to do with AI. The big silver lining of the whole AI bubble is that it just might destroy Oracle for the good of all mankind.

This is different than people using say Claude Code - spending $200 to get $2000 worth of compute is probably pretty good for as long as the subsidy chain lasts.

No investor is being paid profits from new investments. There are no profits being paid pretend or or real, it's just a giant money vacuum.

To the hyperscalers. Who then rent them to the AI companies that are losing hundreds of billions of dollars as fast as they can, and surely won't by unable to pay their bills.

New office space is at least one thing we need less of than new data centers.

What argument are you pretending was made?

You can also talk to the person sitting next to you using your outside voice. Or the person 4 rows back.

Clearly the only way that happens is if you have already made up your mind and just want to find some justification for it.

Which is expected from the lawyers - they are trying to win the case for their side, obviously they are looking to find evidence and precedent for what they want. If they use an genAI tool it will gladly make something up for them.

But the judge - they're supposed to be looking at precedent to guide them, not making up their mind and then finding prior cases that agree with them (and again a genAI tool will gladly make some fiction for them).

> Note - the "jewish space laser" was not something she ever said - it was made up by zionists to make her sound stupid.

Right, what she said was

"""
Then oddly there are all these people who have said they saw what looked like laser or blue beams of light causing the fires, and pictures and videos. I don't know anything about that but I do find it really curious PG&Es partnership with Solaren on space solar generators started in 2009. They announced the launch into space in March 2018, and maybe even put them up before that. Space solar generators collect the suns energy and then beam it back to Earth to a transmitter to convert to electricity. The idea is clean energy to replace coal and oil. If they are beaming the suns energy back to Earth, I'm sure they wouldn't ever miss a transmitter receiving station right??!! I mean mistakes are never made when anything new is invented. What would that look like anyway? A laser or light beam coming down to Earth I guess. Could that cause a fire? Hmmm, I don't know. I hope not! That wouldn't look good for PG&E, Rothschild Inc, Solaren or Jerry Brown who sure does seem fond of PG&E.
"""

Which those who don't want to repeat a rambling paragraph of garbage shorten to "Jewish space lasers". Note she pulled in Rothschild for no reason (Roger Kimmel was on the board of PG&E is her link) so the antisemites know who she is talking about.

I'm not sure the full version makes her seem less stupid though.

> - Or, faced with an old 1,000 line stored procedure that's been there forever and nobody knows exactly what it does, it can summarize and analyze it, and refactor it for maintainability.

If no one knows exactly what it does, how does anyone know if the refactored version does the same thing?

It'll end great. AI agents trying to rip each other off with crypto/etc scams. Best use of resources in a long time.

https://www.moltbook.com/post/...

10 mph is way too fast for that rule. The only speed that can satisfy that rule is 0.

3 not 34...

They have him on video damaging 34 computers, for "more than $400" each time over a three day period.

There has been $46,855 worth of damage over "years", which they suspect was also done by the same person.

If you need to do that to keep your slot then clearly we don't have too many PhDs - if we had too many PhDs there would be less competition.

And someone who is years into a phd program doesn't need to do anything like that to keep their "slot". There isn't an annual culling, the bottom X% aren't kicked out. The performance of one candidate doesn't impact the success of another candidate. You don't get a worse phd because someone else got a better one. There's competition to get in in the first place, but once in it makes no sense to sabotage other candidates. (at least in my experience with phd programs - which admittedly are not at Berkeley or even in the US).

The article has the sentence "No high-tech gates block the exit if you go through the line like normal" in the paragraph before the reddit reference.

The "journalist" can't remember what they wrote ten seconds ago, can't read their own text, or is repeating stupid and incorrect claims to make their boring article seem less pointless. I'm going with the first option.