It convinced u/highmastdon to go out and be an elon musk dick rider. It also convinced them that "hid[ing] behind morality" is somehow a bad thing, which shows everyone the quality of person they are.
I would say a combination of already being rich, being old, and insider trading. Congress can't actually take personal funds from lobbyists legally.
Maybe if someone is in Congress, they can skirt the law around lobbyist gifts due to your position of power, but 1. it doesn't sound very plausible that someone becomes a multimillionaire by squirreling away illegal gifts or campaign funds and 2. to become I doubt small town city councils making these decisions are in a similar place. Most of reality is boring and not like the movies.
Still very few for deserving a tax break based on potential employment opportunities. A DC simply doesn't help the local economy, it's very often a net-negative: it's very resource-intensive while not generating much in terms of economical activity for where it sits at.
In a sense it's purely extractivist consuming land, water, and energy without benefits to the community.
First you clone the API of the winner, because you want to siphon users from its install-base and offer de-risked switch over cost.
Now that you’re winning, others start cloning your API to siphon your users.
Now that you’re losing, you start cloning the current winner, who is probably a clone of your clone.
Highly competitive markets tend to normalize, because lock-in is a cost you can’t charge and remain competitive. The customer holds power here, not the supplier.
Thats also why everyone is trying to build into the less competitive spaces, where they could potentially moat. Tooling, certs, specialized training data, etc
Our (western) economic model forces competing individual companies to be profitable quickly. China can ignore DeepSeek losing money, because they know developing DeepSeek will help China. Not every institution needs to be profitable.
Ah yes, the Western economic model forcing individual American companies like Amazon , Youtube and Uber to become profitable after.. checks notes _14 years_ for Uber, 9 years for Amazon, many years for Youtube.
yes, they want to win the same way they won more or less every other economic competition in the last 30 years, scale out, drop prices and asphyxiate the competition.
Yeah, it’s an interesting one. I think inertia and expectations at this point? I don’t think the big labs anticipated how low the model switching costs would be and how quickly their leads would be eroded (by each other and the upstarts)
They are developing their moats with the platform tooling around it right now though. Look at Anthropic with Routines and OpenAI with Agents. Drop that capability in to a business with loose controls and suddenly you have a very sticky product with high switching costs. Meanwhile if you stick with purely the ‘chat’ use cases, even Cowork and scheduled tasks, you maintain portability.
No, they are not. If they were "racing to AGI" they would be working together. OpenAI would still be focused on being a non-profit. Anthropic wouldn't be blocking distillation on their models.
If by AGI you mean IPO, sure. I genuinely don't believe Dario nor Sam should be trusted at this point. Elon levels of overpromising and underdelivering.
If you want other people to know whether you're being genuine or sarcastic, you'll have to put a bit more effort into your comments. Your comment just adds noise.
Seeking: Part time work or an offer I can't refuse.
Are you stuck using Oracle Cloud? Does working with their support team make you die inside? Do you need help on IPv6, OS Image Creation, Oracle Cloud Agent, vNIC management, OKE, or why things suck the way they do and how to work around them? Bump my line.
I've learned more about how to use Oracle Cloud than I would ever like to know and I've also found and gotten fix a few major platform defects.
The amount of hidden engineering in Analog systems is mind blowing. Imagine how many hours were spent in a lab figuring out the exact right timings, chemical mixtures, and circuit design needed to make modern Cinema exist as we know it.
Yeah, I read stuff like this and think the engineers back in the 50's were some of the smartest. I certainly would not have been able to cut the muster back then.
Numerous examples in early digital era as well, see e.g. fast inverse square root, cga color hacks (also entire demoscene) and endless tricks in software that has been outrunning hardware for a while.
Later these were declared wrong, considered harmful, having bad smell, not passing code review and it all became a boring task of combining lego blocks. Sure these analog guys had insane tricks in their sleeves, but our “collective industry” would probably stigmatize them immediately if met today.
Hey, don't spoil it. I was enjoying the image of him standing alone, pulling out a sword and charging at a battalion of soldiers arrayed on a parade ground.
Certainly I think we should ignore the trope that we've left that analog crap behind up and realise that those are just some of the giants whose shoulders we stand upon.
Every generation has its challenges, but we can be greatful that the generation before us gave us new ones. It has not always been the case.
It's possible for analogue engineering to be incredibly challenging impressive and, to put it crassly, a bit crap.
I certainly don't miss the days of adjusting tint settings, headroom, over-scan and interlacing. Digital isn't without its issues of course, but even a lot of those trace their history back to analogue hacks - article case in point.
There is this side effect of digital lowering the bar though. Back in the analogue days, you needed to be a wizard to get anything done, which meant a lot of the people then seemed to care about the details more than they do now. Digital makes everything so easy that anyone can do it, which can go both ways.
Spinning rust drives store analog magnetics that get error corrected to digital. Same with electron potentials in ram. Same with SSDs. Signals over HDMI are converted to analog to display.
Sure, it's nice to deal with crisp neat digital signals... But to get there, you always need to deal with analog.
It's often in retrospect as well. It can take time for the impact of certain innovations to unfold, and it often begins with a small group of people. The breadth of human innovation is now so wide that a scientist/engineer from the 1950s simply doesn't have the same scope of problems and areas of study to work on.
That's why people like Leonardo da Vinci could exist, the scope of human understanding was much smaller and so their work was much more wide-reaching and foundational. Today, you can dedicate your life's work to some hyper-specific problem in a very specific field. Tomorrow, this work might seem fundamentally primitive or foundational in the way that previous generations are perceived.
Only because you are sitting on top of a million prebuilt tools and products. Essentially the same as someone who just purchased the hardware and plugged a video feed in from the camera.
Usually the protocol stack is PHY/MAC/IP/TCP/TLS/application which is 6 layers. It's the same as the OSI stack except for the lack of a session layer, which is somewhat split between TCP 3-way handshake and TLS authentication/authorization.
TCP and IP exist as part of the Internet stack. The OSI stack consisted of an alternate set of standards (like LAPB and X.400) which were not widely adopted.
Even if you map Internet protocols to the OSI model -- which is imprecise at best -- TCP represents the transport layer, and IP the network layer. They're not a single component.
You made me stop and question myself for a second, but this definitely isn't right. Usually when people talk about "TCP/IP" it's shorthand for the whole "Internet Protocol Suite", but even naively TCP and IP are two different layers.
Yep, the slash is meaningful. I think of writing "TCP/IP" that way as in a fraction -- "TCP over IP" or "TCP on IP". At least, that was how my brain learned it.
It's a shame that they can't transition it to a read-only archive type site, where everything is still accessible and playable- jut no new updates or content.
That's what kongregate did I believe. They disabled the forums, the chats, no new games, no new achievements and that's it. It's a strange sensation to enter kongregate which had such a thriving community and see everything so... static
Literally nothing? Just leave it as is. There is a browser extension called Ruffle that lets you play older (AS2) Flash games, and eventually it will support newer (AS3) Flash games too.
Edit: most users won't have the Ruffle extension, so the one great thing they could do is add it to the site with a single <script> tag :)
Flash games are static content (except for high scores). A Flash game is just a SWF file, typically a couple MB (or KB!).
If you'd like to experience the games that were available on Miniclip back in the day, your best bet is FlashPoint, a big offline archive of Flash games (ships with integrated FlashPlayer and a nice UI to search for games).
because it's not the specific action. it's the reason behind the action.
> Stop pretending normal people care about this
Stop pretending you're a normal person and it's everyone else who is wrong