This would imply, at least theoretically, that the laws of physics themselves would break down under certain conditions: that, for example, water could be made to spontaneously explode.

The NS equations are just a model of the physics of fluids. Particularly, they assume a continuum whereas actual fluids, having molecules and such, are not a continuum. For most engineering problems, you can assume the fluid is a continuum. At very small scales, such as at a singularity, such an assumption is not valid. So, having the NS equations break down says nothing at all about the "laws of physics" (basic conservation laws) or how physical fluids might really behave. It's a mildly interesting result that existence is not a feature of the NS equations, but this is fodder for mathematician, not physicists.

I think it's worthwhile to point out that 28 kW is a fairly mundane data-center cabinet. A modern one can get up to 400 kW. Also, a decent data center would consume ~25% of the power just for cooling. I'm curious what that number is for a satellite that can only do radiation.

I worry that Musk will trash SpaceX like he did with Tesla. For a long time I wondered how SpaceX toed the line between crazy idea (e.g., catching a booster with arms) and stupid idea. I fear that the checks on stupid are gone.

All anyone or a press release can talk about is AI nowadays.

However, this machine uses Grace-Hopper superchips and a distributed-memory network. It is more, or maybe equally, suited for computational tasks involving predictive science. As an example, predictive science includes solving classic and boring partial-differential-equations (PDEs), i.e., providing foundational training data for scientific AI. Using both predictive science and AI to solve a problem has a lot of promise and this machine is well-suited for the task.

Yes, there is an environmental cost to this machine, as there is for everything. However, it is much more likely to help find the solutions to overcome climate change and more than pay for its expense. Here is the hosting center's research page.

Seriously WTF. The contortions they go through to outsource. First, it's apparently cheaper to hire a dummy with a security clearance (so-called escort) and a Chinese programmer than just hire a U.S. citizen! Actual security be damned! Management, including the U.S. government thinks this is a good idea (detractors voicing concern are ignored as usual).

Second, if you have to review even moderately complex code, it usually takes more time to review than write it, even if you are more skilled than the author - unless you are already very familiar with the framework. This is because you have to load a mental map of how the code works with the surrounding environment and it takes a lot of study to build that map. These escorts are certainly close to useless.

Third, of course Trump disbands the federal Cyber Safety Review Board for who knows what reason.

This is the proper way to assess AI intelligence at current technology levels. You don't even need to define consciousness. Remember the philosophical thought, "if I stop thinking about you, do you still exist?" As the parent states, LLM AI's literally stop existing, from your context, once you stop interacting with them. Questions such as AI welfare are pure foolishness arising from deep misunderstandings.

I would also say it is fun to drink, even if alone, but generally dislike being drunk. A beer is a delight on a nice summer day. Wines are great, so much variety, as is a shot of really good scotch on occasion. If your motivation is something other than getting drunk, you can also invest more in quality than quantity.

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.