For deaf, since one of the features is captioning a speaker.

On the one hand, I know all too well that the AI will screw it up some.

However, if you watch closed captioning, you know that the captions are already frequently messed up, long before even AI was a possible strategy. Usually the live captioned stuff had lower quality, but you'd see it in scripted shows too.

I also wonder about the converse, captioning someone using sign language for those that don't know it.

But that FOV is just so tiny....

You would need to add at least a couple of 0s for it to even begin to seem reasonable.

Given his other examples were mostly containing real stuff, you seem to totally agree.

The railroads continue to be key to this day, even if they overreacted in the day.

The Internet infrastructure absolutely is critical now, despite the somewhat false start.

I dunno. China is a "market socialist" system -- which is a contradiction in terms. If China is socialist, then for practical purposes Norway and Sweden have to be even *more* socialist because they have a comprehensive public welfare system which China lacks. And those Nordic countries are rated quite high on global measures of political and personal freedom, and very low on corruption. In general they outperform the US on most of those measures, although the US is better on measures of business deregulation.

It makes no sense to claim Chinese courts have a lot of power, although it may seem that way â" itâ(TM)s supposed to seem that way. One of the foundational principles of Chinese jurisprudence is party supremacy. Every judge is supervised by a PLC â" party legal committee â" which oversees budgets, discipline and assignments in the judiciary. They consult with the judges in sensitive trials to ensure a politically acceptable outcome.

So it would be more accurate to characterize the courts as an instrument of party power rather than an independent power center.

From time to time Chinese court decisions become politically inconvenient, either through the supervisors in the PLC missing something or through changing circumstances. In those cases there is no formal process for the party to make the courts revisit the decision. Instead the normal procedure is for the inconvenient decision to quietly disappear from the legal databases, as if it never happened. When there is party supremacy, the party can simply rewrite judicial history to its current needs.

An independent judiciary seems like such a minor point; and frankly it is often an impediment to common sense. But without an independent judiciary you canâ(TM)t have rule of law, just rule by law.

Hereâ(TM)s the problem with that scenario: court rulings donâ(TM)t mean much in a state ruled by one party. China has plenty of progressive looking laws that donâ(TM)t get enforced if it is inconvenient to the party. There are emission standards for trucks and cars that should help with their pollution problems, but there are no enforcement mechanisms and officials have no interest in creating any if it would interfere with their economic targets or their private interests.

China is a country of strict rules and lax enforcement, which suits authoritarian rulers very well. It means laws are flouted routinely by virtually everyone, which gives the party leverage. Displease the party, and they have plenty of material to punish you, under color of enforcing laws. It sounds so benign, at least theyâ(TM)re enforcing the law part of the time, right? Wrong. Laws selectively enforced donâ(TM)t serve any public purpose; theyâ(TM)re just instruments of personal power.

Americans often donâ(TM)t seem to understand the difference between rule of law and rule *by* law. Itâ(TM)s ironic because the American Revolution and constitution were historically important in establishing the practicality of rule of law, in which political leaders were not only expected to obey the laws themselves, but had a duty to enforce the law impartially regardless of their personal opinions or interests.

Rule *by* law isnâ(TM)t a Chinese innovation, it was the operating principle for every government before 1789. A government that rules *by* law is only as good as the men wielding power, and since power corrupts, itâ(TM)s never very good for long.

Doubt the schools would love them. Schools love the Google ecosystem and particularly how they can be an organization that micromanages what the students can do all while having a supremely disposable device. The price and touchscreens are nice and all, but it's really about the Google infrastructure. It's also a contributor to why a lot of businesses like Windows, the effort invested in *not* letting the user be able to do what they want at the whim of some designated third party.

Besides, the Chromebooks are generally about half even that price. Greatly helpful when there's a high chance that a device will get destroyed within a couple of years.

I certainly see the appeal as an individual, but schools would require a great deal of effort that I think Apple wouldn't see as worth it.

Have they done rack scale nvlink other than Grace? Usually I see racks of systems with GPUs, but the NVLink terminates within each server, rather than going between servers.

NVLink nowadays even in a single system (as of Blackwell) looks a lot more like infiniband, but still seeing Blackwells usually as GPUs in x86 boxes with NVLink staying inside. Multi-server fabric seems to be RDMA over ethernet as the favored selection for now. Maybe I'm missing some segment, but I can at least say externally switched NVLink is absolutely not 'just as well as GPUs'.

Intel still has a large share of the datacenter market, whether they really deserve it or not. Hence they actually have competition. Versus their flailing around accelerators which both sucked and never got traction. Just like I went looking for a new laptop and in some segments, the vendors only did Intel even as AMD also has everything better in that market too.

Well, they actually have had that available for a bit of time with Grace Hopper. I don't have hard data, but anecdotally it feels like this and rack scale NVLink haven't had the uptake nVidia presumed. So nVidia is *trying* to compete but hitting headwinds even in their darling AI segment. Given nVidia failed to wholly acquire ARM and ARM being an uphill battle in the conservative datacenter market, I could see an x86 equivalent of the 'Grace' strategy being attempted in collaboration with Intel. nVidia gets locked in integration advantage and Intel gets the scraps of the x86 half.

Quite, but AMD is *miles* closer than Intel was to being a realistic threat on this front.

I was kind of surprised too, since growing up my household would make a 600 mile round trip like 3 or 4 times a year. The last 3 years I've been in that 16% too, though for quite a few years before that I admittedly was in the 84%.

Think I've read a fair amount suggesting that the 'family road trip' has declined over the years.

It's the basis of how people get elected and promoted.

If a bunch of people are marketing a 747 as a vehicle like some alien ship that can pause in mid air, go side to side, and backwards and underwater and into space, then it's worth pointing out it's closer to being a mechanical bird than an alien ship.

This is comparing apples and applejacks. If you only care about cost per calorie, people may as just drink canola oil and take a daily vitamin pill. What we really need to do is look at the total cost of living when eating real foods vs packaged trash "food". If we were honest about adding up the related external costs of illness, healthcare, discontent, disability, etc and look at it more holistically, I believe the "cheaper" shit food starts to lose out fast. But nobody wants to do that. Hell, we can't even get people to agree that being a fatass is unhealthy.

And the idea that it costs a lot to eat healthy is a myth that needs to die. Some things are more expensive, sure, but you can make a healthy meal with cheaper options as well. The truth is that people are lazy and addicted to the results of 50 years engineering to create the mouth porn that line most store shelves.

Easy to say when you live in or near London (which as I recall, you do).

There's nothing wrong with local time, and there are good reasons humans have used it literally for as long as we've had clocks. You are trading one mental adjustment -- "what time is it where Bob lives?" -- with a different one -- "what time is it where I am when the sun is directly overhead?" Guess which one you need to worry about more often?

And if you think adjusting to time zones is annoying now when traveling, imagine needing readjust your entire mental model of the solar day - where sunrise, noon, and sunset are on the clock. But hey, I guess you didn't need to adjust your watch. Hurray?

Local time is a "human sized" solution to the problem of timekeeping while UTC is a planet-sized solution to it.

Nonsense. Every single business has a list of their operating hours posted. Some open at 6am, some at 10am. Some are open on Sunday, others closed. Some close for certain holidays, others for others (or none). Some receive deliveries earlier than customers, others don't.

Most people in the US may not be accustomed to the idea of summer hours, but it's not a complicated idea and people would catch on pretty quickly.