In 1998, 1 Mbps of bandwidth cost $1200 per month. Today it is about 10 cents.

I feel your argument lacks merit. In 1998, the average size of an image file on the web was between 2k to 12k, and the average web page was around 100K. Today the average web page is 3M.

1Mbps is certainly cheaper today, but it is also certainly less useful.

circling the sun twice in the time it takes Neptune to complete three solar orbits

Even more impressive, it circles the sun four times in the time it takes Neptune to complete six solar orbits!

I'm sorry, but anyone who asks Epstein for antibiotics to treat their STD from sleeping with Epstein-provided prostitutes, also surreptitiously slipping some antibiotics to his wife in case he infected her, is someone I no longer give the benefit of the doubt to. Look at Bill Gates' shifty sly grin when he denounced having social ties to Epstein on a television interview. That shifty grin is the same grin he had in his mugshot when being arrested for a traffic violation as a young adult. He breaks the rules, smiles about it, and continues on with his narcissistic, malignant behavior. Stop glazing him, he won't glaze you back.

Alex Ziskind has all of the equipment variations, and he benchmarks them all. A single RTX Pro 6000 doesn't even come close to comparing to a cluster of M3 Ultras.

I flipped a coin once, and 50% of the people around me hated that it landed on heads! Therefore, tails is the superior side of the coin.

https://www.icr.org/content/fo... [icr.org]

I'm sure all the words on that page sound very impressive and complex to simple minds who have no desire to understand them.

Humans don't "know" facts either.

It's pretty much a trope that coffee has been bad for us one week and then good for us again the next week, ad infinitum.

It would be very amusing to see the world through your eyes.

How exactly do you think science works? Do you think that someone asks a question, and then scientists all get together in a single meeting to answer that question, and then they post the answer and claim it is the full and unquestionable truth?

No, that would be ridiculous. Instead, science is performed by millions of individual scientists, who each seek to understand some particular aspect of reality just a little bit better. They perform discovery, form a hypothesis, test the hypothesis, and then publish their results for the world to review.

There is no illuminati-style organization that coordinates all of the scientists, and their findings, together. Thus, one thousand different studies about various effects of coffee upon human health might be performed, and they might all study slightly different aspects of the topic, or test things in different ways. This in no way implies that the scientific method is flawed, or that "scientists" are just a bunch of goofy mind-changers who can never quite figure out which way is up when it comes to figuring out what science actually means.

This is to be expected for something as complex as science, unless you have an extraordinarily simple mind.

You apparently have no idea about how this feature works, nor does your reading comprehension allow you to figure out that he was being figurative when he claimed that he, as the user, asked OpenAI to delete his data. Nowhere in the product feature workflow does OpenAI ask or tell you that your data is about to be deleted. He even goes so far as to explicitly mention this in the beginning of his blog post.

People may be saying that there's no hard evidence against Bill Gates here, but have you seen the televised interview where he was asked about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein? I have never seen anyone in my life act so shifty in answering a question like that.

All enshittified services now beg for engagement, to make lines go up for investor. This is just the typical progression that one would expect, as our society approaches one or more episodes of Black Mirror.

To be fair, he didn't think that he was testing a "delete" feature.

No, he's right. Maybe try reading TFA again to see if your reading comprehension gets a little better this time around.

Also ChatGPT is still a relatively new product that's still trying to evovle.

Let's also consider that OpenAI only had revenue of $20 billion in 2025. It's unrealistic to expect good software from any company that's not doing at least $500 billion in revenue per year.

Don't be stupid.