re-thc

17 ms·

451.
by re-thc 9mo ago
> You're mad at me for razzing a corporation in the name of open source? No, just that you're just complaining for the sake of it. > I'm glad I left when I did. How were you able to read and reply?
452.
by re-thc 9mo ago
> You don't go to coffee shops and probably don't care for coffee if you're talking about instant coffee. Who says I don't? What I do has nothing to do with the market. > Why even speak at all on this subject that
453.
by re-thc 9mo ago
> you have to pay him back with interest or equity That's the price for infinite scaling. If a business can't make more than that it should be shut down. i.e. do you want to make 25% of 1 billion or 5% of 1000 billion?
454.
by re-thc 9mo ago
> I presume if you invest in Google you are indirectly (but significantly) invested in Waymo, like it is with Anthropic? You also get some Starlink.
455.
by re-thc 9mo ago
> Why does Google need outside investors? i.e. why should I use my money if I can use someone elses'?
456.
by re-thc 9mo ago
> These projects should be ruthlessly forked and all corporate development efforts ignored. Please do and show that it can be sustainable. It’s easy to complain at home. It’s hard to actually keep it going.
457.
by re-thc 9mo ago
And? As people (the consumers) get automated away there will be less. We also have things like instant coffee, automatic coffee machines, etc that have all reduced the need for manual coffee.
458.
by re-thc 9mo ago
> I think I'd like to be a barista or deliver the mail once all the jobs are gone. Those are even easier to automate or have already been most of the way.
459.
by re-thc 9mo ago
> By contrast, engineers mostly require a laptop and company hoodie... > That low marginal cost Not true. That's how everything falls apart. Scaling software teams isn't simple. There's lots to account for. Do you just
460.
by re-thc 9mo ago
> You just click "buy" with another provider? They just host the model for money, nothing more. Start with where the GPU and rest of it comes from.
461.
by re-thc 9mo ago
The point is it doesn't work like that. Check out all the special purpose vehicles, loans and fund raises going around in that space. Deals claiming for $x billion in funds only got millions + GPU rentals in special deals. And the offe
462.
by re-thc 9mo ago
Australia has drop bears anyhow. Do they exist? Seems par for course.
463.
by re-thc 9mo ago
And who funds those providers? They can clearly pull the plug any time. The so called many providers is the same group under the hood. Nvidia was noted as having most of their revenue heavily tilted against only a few major customers for ex
464.
by re-thc 9mo ago
> Their cost is not real. They can’t even officially account for any nvidia gpus they managed to buy outside the official channels.
465.
by re-thc 9mo ago
How do they run on US servers? Self host? That’s not going to be cheap whilst the big AI players horde resources like memory.
466.
by re-thc 9mo ago
> can’t just make a second Cloudflare account for Prod Multi account support when you pay for enterprise.
467.
by re-thc 9mo ago
> or that it was always like this The focus has been on new features and moving fast for quite some years vs reliability.
468.
by re-thc 9mo ago
> Was this ever a thing? At some point yes. Lots of large financial institutions had such projects. IBM e.g. was involved in quite a few of them.
469.
by re-thc 9mo ago
> can't continue to function even if acquisitions were only 80% value creation on average The number is much much lower than that. Most acquisitions fail or don't have much impact.
470.
by re-thc 9mo ago
> there is no incentives for cloudflare to make astro better, or even keep it around There is - to counter NextJs. NextJs is a pain to host outside Vercel and makes Cloudflare lose customers. In theory that's why Gatsby was bought o
471.
by re-thc 9mo ago
> The Astro claim is that astro developers will all continue full-time on it. So why acquire it instead of supporting it? In defense? Someone else can acquire it.
472.
by re-thc 9mo ago
> My impression for the past decade or so is that Radeon for PC is AMD's way of keeping their GPU division's engine running During this time AMD was focused on CPUs. They've already said that they'll focus more on GPU
473.
by re-thc 9mo ago
> there was a massive spike at the end when car manufacturers Which barely impacts TSMC. Most of their revenue and focus is on the advanced nodes - not the mature 1s. > As far as I know there was never a demand dip at any point in the
474.
by re-thc 9mo ago
Get testers to collect feedback without paying for hosting costs. To kill off competition with closed off models that are behind services. Some countries have rather specific reasons e.g. China. Most high end AI tooling e.g. Nvidia GPUs are
475.
by re-thc 9mo ago
> I would think that if they were serious they would commit to cofinancing new foundries or signing long term minimum purchasing agreements. That would ruin TSMC and others' independence. Nvidia already did buy Intel shares so it is
476.
by re-thc 9mo ago
Time for AMD to shine?
477.
by re-thc 9mo ago
> I mean the amount of money invested across just a handful of AI companies is currently staggering and their respective revenues are no where near where they need to be. That’s a valid reason to be skeptical. Yes and no. Some of it just
478.
by re-thc 9mo ago
> Yes, but those aren't contracted commitments, and we know some of them are equity swaps. It's worse than not contracted. Nvidia said in their earnings call that their OpenAI commitment was "maybe".
479.
by re-thc 9mo ago
> I am of the opinion that Nvidia's hit the wall with their current architecture Not likely since TSMC has a new process with big gains. > The story with Intel Was that their fab couldn’t keep up not designs.
480.
by re-thc 9mo ago
> and it doesn't even offer anything like Shows Tailwind was just too little too late.

More ›