Monopolies aren't about marketshare. It's all in how you use it. That people prefer Chrome even while it eats all their RAM really says something about the other browser choices. Especially when Edge is built on Chromium, just with a worse UI.

And by the way, "elderly" is usually referring to mindset in this case. Sounds like you're too young in that sense to catch on. We don't have a word for when it happens to Gen Alpha, who grew up on mostly touch interfaces and multiple OSes on different device types - zero depth on a daily driver work OS.

That's why latency is more important.

I really doubt that they finally fixed their scheduler to actually de-prioritize background tasks properly. That would be bigger news.

With Thunderbolt 5, you theoretically have a 120Gb/s link between them. Still researching...apparently there's something called RDMA over Thunderbolt 5 which can give direct memory access form one to the other. The latency is still about 30x-50x higher with RDMA vs local RAM but that's still crazy. And the bandwidth of local RAM is also much faster, which I assume is a little less important than latency.

Since it's all a bunch of matrix math across ALL of the RAM, it's still going to be slow. But it's at least possible to run models that couldn't before on the same hardware.

$2 billion for any government program of this scale is really not bad. The support is scaled to the poverty level of the region. If they are getting a 50% discount, they are either rural (1%-19% eligible for National School Lunch Program) or in a relatively poor urban rea (20-30% eligible for school lunch program).

Guaranteed funding for connectivity actually helps provide incentive to companies to build services for these areas. This is long-term guaranteed income to any company willing to run fiber to an otherwise unserviced area. I think that $3000 rate would be a lot higher if the public schools in the same town didn't have a discount too. The cost is driven by having multiple customers to support the infrastructure build out.

This is part of what's funded by the Universal Service Fund (USF fee) on your phone bill. And it's by far the least wasteful, since it's not about connecting individual households.

These are baseless claims as far as I can tell. Someone started a rumor, probably based on a mistake in a legal reference library entry in Minnesota. That library said they didn't rely on official records and only got information from secondary sources like Wikipedia. This is not enough grounds to start a whole investigation unless they were a political enemy.

She came from a country that was in civil war and there is no documentation available from there anymore.

Unpredictable maybe, not not unenforceable. They can choose to terminate a business relationship whenever they want as long as it's not based on a protected class. It doesn't even have to be in the TOS.

A situation where someone's identity is formed primarily through interaction with non-humans would still be the main issue.

This is the violent video games argument all over again.

Did you look at the article you are commenting on before saying this?

The amount of needed light is the goal. Efficiency is then the amount of electricity needed to reach the goal. If you overshoot light output that's wasted energy.

Yes, it does:
set_motion(direction="left",steering_percent=50, speed_mps=1.0, duration_s=10,reason="Cone gap opens to the left; ease in.")

How else did you think an LLM would be able to control it?

Of the solution overall, not the individual device.

I think the last thing you want is something that has to generate long strings of text to turn or brake suddenly.

If they're both brighter and more efficient it could still be using similar amounts of electricity.

A 50/50 revenue split isn't typical for big studios. I think they usually are more like 80/20 for the first weekend. Ketchup is too small to negotiate better than 50/50. I think the only reason they got it that high is by keeping it flat and by theaters knowing it was produced by WB.

But WB definitely wouldn't have done as good marketing it as the word of mouth and news reporting on this rare case. They would have spent more on marketing and possibly still had a smaller audience.