Low end Nvidia quadro cards (now called RTX) fill that niche. For example, a T400 uses 30W and can drive 3 x 4K monitors at 120 Hz. In a lab, I've seen these used 24/7 for more than 6 years without issue (to give an idea here, a server-grade motherboard failure would be more common). The drivers may be open-source now: https://developer.nvidia.com/b..., at least on Linux.

If you want to game, then I wouldn't recommend one of these cards just on a performance/price basis. Also the lower-end RTX cards usually significantly lag several versions behind the most current architecture. But for a quiet, well-built card in a business workstation, they work well.

Where's the meta moderation when you need it, right? /s

Look at the slopes and curvature of your graph and consider that it is nearly 2025, not 2023. If China did not yet surpass the EU, it's only a matter of time (measured in months). Some sources (from Nov, 2024, not an old graph like yours) state it already happened:

1) https://www.nytimes.com/intera...
2) (non-paywalled source) https://www.carbonbrief.org/an...

And they don't believe in the system because they were left behind, by both parties. Reagan broke the unions, Clinton globalized the jobs, et cetera, going on for more than three decades. For a while, you could fool people - yes your service job pay is stagnant, but goods are cheaper. Meanwhile the divide between the rich, who took all the benefits from globalization, and poor grew enormously. 35 years later, a blue-collar worker looks at the situation with despair and is told they are "privileged".

Burn it all down I guess.

And let's be clear that Trump will not fix things one bit. Tariffs are proposed as a solution (maybe they are part of one) but in the short term will not bring back the jobs and only make goods more expensive. Opportunities such as revitalizing the economy by revitalizing the energy infrastructure, while addressing serious environmental problems, will be missed out on. The likes of the people who know the problem, talk about the problem, and propose actual solutions do not get elected. In the 2020 primary, Bernie Sanders was "too extreme" and Elizabeth Warren was "too intellectual". Instead you get everyday-man Joe or some other anointed, fits a particular demographic, leader... or a demagogue like Trump.

I don't see a solution. Democracy is not set up for finding intelligent solutions. Historically, it took major trauma such as a world war to change directions towards equalizing and benefiting all of society. So while I can understand the vote to "burn in all down", it was extremely foolish - we will all burn and it will be extremely painful if not lethal.

All these bi-yearly discussions do is remind me how much I hate morning people :)

I don't get it... they want to go with something more expensive, more difficult (infrastructure wise), and less efficient?

I get with a phone you may trade efficiency for convenience. But with a car we're talking serious amounts of energy and those losses stack up. Also, plugging in a car is not difficult nor bothersome, assuming you have infrastructure for it. What problem is this supposed to address?

Don't be fooled that this is not happening in STEM. A classical grade curve (circa 2000) would have an average of 70% and a standard deviation of 10%. Greater than 1 standard deviation (80%) gets you an A. Greater than 2 standard deviations (90%) gets you an A+. Likewise, less than two standard deviations (50%) is a failure. Summed over a few course, you could truly identify exceptional students. I doubt that the extremely low standard deviations of the curves described in the summary provide much more than noise.

But that is by design. Even in STEM, there is now the idea that every student is exceptional *if* given the right instruction. See, back in 2000, the problem was that all the instructors sucked. Nowadays, all the instructors are amazing and that is why everyone gets at least an 80% and there are no failures. Well, you can either believe that or that standards slipped.

How did this happen? Academia is now big business. Students are the customers and the customer is never wrong.

At least he made the right decision in the end after finally breaking though an obvious echo chamber. How often have we not seen that in the last couple of years leading to extraordinarily stupid decisions... Putin, Musk, etc.

Since there is no clear definition, how about everyone fucks off and leaves the decision to a woman and her doctor?

While regulations can be burdensome, what you see here is the alternative to a (functional) FAA.

For every "Windows just works", there is a "Linux just works". For me, it was a network driver for a 10GBase-T card. Windows refused to install until I sought out and manually provided the driver. Debian (stable even!!) "just worked". I used that Windows install for playing Win-native games. After taking a break for 8 months, I booted it again to find the sound choppy. I installed updates hoping for a fix but progressively, things just got worse... there was a conversion to W11 too. Eventually I was at the recovery screen and then even that stopped working. My only remaining option was a full reinstall (assuming that would have fixed whatever the problem was). About that time I noticed just how good Proton (by Valve on Steam) was for Windows games on Linux and never bothered.

Maybe if my Windows skills matched by Linux skills, I wouldn't have gotten in that situation. I do have a Windows Laptop Studio which I like (if not quite as much as the earlier detachable models). I did a full reinstall on that laptop without issue. It's weird now. Often I do my work in WSL (Linux) on my Windows laptop, then go and play a Windows game on my Linux workstation!

It's quantified in the article (that is one of the main points of the article - what is the actual fucking risk).

• 2 drinks a week will (statistically) take off less than 1 week from your life span.
• A drink a day will take off 2.5 months.
• 5 drinks a day is 2 years.

Writing this while enjoying a good beer!

I was really looking forward to this and jumped at the chance to buy tickets. If you do miss it, take comfort that you didn't miss much. It's a "watch at home" movie. Overall, the film is very superficial in that you skim the surface of all aspects (construction, launch, observations). For example, they'll tell you it is at L2 and that this is further than the moon but give you no substance on why it was put there, what it takes to stay there, or even what L2 is. If you didn't know anything at all about JWST, you might learn something. Or maybe it is mostly for schoolchildren. The images mostly show JWST seeing more than Hubble; and the commentary is, "here with infrared, we see through the dust and can see more". Frankly, the deep field is not any more profound than Hubble except that you can see further back. The producers also have an annoying tendency to make every image involving stars rotate. There is no context for JWST related to Hubble or what comes next. And the beginning and end unnecessarily grasp at, "are we alone in the universe," instead of simply being satisfied with the science mission.

You get a few insights and experiences of people involved with the project. That is basically the only plus.

Also, prepare from rock-concert-levels of sound. Not only for the launch (which is fine, that's why you go to IMAX), but also when anyone is talking. The loudness and sharpness of the dialogue almost felt like clipping. And I'm getting old... I should be losing my hearing, not complaining about volume!

That's a bit unfair. NASA itself funded dragon and it would be stupid for the government to fund its own vehicle when commercial industry is more than capable. Not sure what the GP is going on about either though - it is an achievement to transfer the tech from government to commercial. This is what you want to happen.

And starship... and KC-46... basically any time they try to do a fixed price contract. But they learned their lesson. It's simple, no more fixed price contracts in the future (no, they are not going to go back to competent engineering management.)

Sigh... Let me explain you what happens when Teacher A tries to maintain academic standards. Parents complain to the administration that their little "Einsteins" are getting bad grades versus the Teacher B's class where the average is 10% higher. Teacher A can then elect to lower their standards, get fired, or move to a private institution.

In some cases, that 10% difference is because Teacher B is a more effective instructor. In aggregate, grade inflation is not happening because Teacher B was the more effective instructor.

Go ahead. Sign up as a teacher and try to change this. Walk in their shoes. Maybe you can improve the quality of education in the entire district.