True, but it’s not a competition. When big tech tightens their belts NVDA starves to death

Edit: guess I forgot to point out the hyperbole. Nvidia obviously won’t literally die

It’ll implode but there are much larger elephants in the room - geopolitical dumbassery and the suddenly transient nature of the CHIPS Act are two biggies.

Third, high flying growth, blue sky darlings, they’re flaky. In a downturn growth is worth 0 fucking dollars, throw that shit in a dumpster and rotate into staples. People can push off a phone upgrade or new TV and cut down on subscriptions, but they’ll always need Pampers.

The thing propping up AI and semis is an arms race between those high flying tech companies, so this whole thing is even more prone to imploding than tech itself, since a ton of revenue comes from tech. Sensitive sector supported by an already sensitive sector. House of cards with NVDA sitting right at the tippy top. Apple, Facebook, those kinds of companies, when they start trimming back it’s over.

But, it’s one of those things that is anyone’s guess. When you think it’s not even possible for everything to still have steam one of the big guys like TSMC posts some really delightful earnings and it gets another second wind, for the 29th time.

Definitely a house of cards tho, and suddenly a lot more precarious because suddenly nobody knows how policy will affect the industry or the market as a whole

They say shipping is the bellwhether of the economy and there’s a lot of truth to that. I think semis are now the bellwhether of growth. Sit back and watch the change in the wind

I actually blocked most of those groups but one was some climate community on another instance. There was a post where someone asked what they could do personally to help prevent climate change, and it was full of political theory as a response.

Someone said they actively boycott Starbucks because the CEO flies a jet in order to commute to Seattle to California, and if the government won’t do anything they felt like the least they can do is just commit to never giving them and their lobbyists a single penny ever again.

And they were downvoted to like -20 and had a dozen people attacking them over shifting the blame from the corporations to the working class by framing it in such a way that the working class should have any responsibility for the actions of the corporation. It was like watching a bunch of picketers calling someone a scab.

And I’m just reading it like “what the fuck guys, you’re sitting around discussing political strategies that have so far done absolutely nothing, they’re doing something, they have a point, the lobbyists make the laws, so defunding the lobbyists does make a lot of sense. He’s flying in a jet to work because people give him money, helllLLLOOOooo.”

Someone even went so far as to argue that a lot of people need to go to Starbucks because they might need a quiet space to study or hang out, so I jumped in pointing out that most municipalities have a library at the minimum, and people were fine before coffee shops were everywhere, and I got downvoted and jumped on by half a dozen people for not understanding the plight of others.

Homeless people need somewhere to go, so I’m an asshole for suggesting that other people could go to Starbucks less? Beats the hell out of me

In some climate forum, for no reason other than to win a stupid internet argument over the responsibility of emissions, everyone began defending the necessity of Starbucks of all things. Seriously. And at the same time, consumers shouldn’t have to endure hardships for the climate because they should instead focus on affecting policy, in order for places like Starbucks to change, because they’re fucking horrible. In my mind I was just like “well are corporations good or bad, or at the moment are they just convenient as both in order to use that person as a punching bag?” but noped right out.

It was basically a rat’s nest of tangled up incongruent statements that all led back to ‘fuck that person for saying they make a very small effort to do something towards a corporation as opposed to attempting to reshape politics’

So yeah, shit like that.

Maybe a simple “while I disagree with A due to B, it does have some merit because of C. But in my opinion I think D is more effective, and if you’d like to learn more about D, here are some resources! :)”

A lot of communities on Lemmy have a ‘scene kid’ subculture and they will just harass people right off the platform for not being true enough to the cause, despite being for the cause.

You got a bunch of raindrops. They want to become a hurricane. They simply need a warm breeze but shit blows sideways instead. The corners of Lemmy where movements could be happening are basically mosh pits

I’m not trying to argue with you or correct you or anything, just pointing out why this is bad, how it shouldn’t be as it is, but it’s on deaf ears to the people I’m lamenting about. And you’re correct, a 2nd Reddit would suck, but Lemmy could be better if those people were being better.

If there’s anything anyone mad about anything in the world should know, by know, don’t attack people on the same team, welcome them in

It’s just funny to me that we’ve perfected the art of spitting things out with an inkjet and filing it and nuking the drive, and now they’re gonna go in with data entry and put it all back on a computer and hand it off. You’re right, nothing learned

2020: air gaps

2025: Look at this spongebob USB stick I found in the parking lot. They don’t pay me shit so this is a nice bonus

Nothing bad will ever happen when you kick a whole bunch of sensitive data to some third party to kick around in a couple server rooms

Lemmy has a toxic puddle problem. If your first experience with Lemmy is sauntering into a community and getting chased out for not agreeing with someone hard enough, something like that, you’ll probably just go back to Reddit and say ‘that place is full of whack jobs’.

And the default sort, kinda hard to dodge

Nobody will use this math in our lifetime.

That’s a presumption. Have you ever considered that there’s a non-zero chance that you’re wrong?

Does it need to? Does anything need to? I’d argue that humans toying with the novelty of ‘seemingly useless’ things has enriched humanity by a whole lot. Archmedes basically dicking around doing fuck all in that shed of his instead of growing crops

I’m not even understanding what AI is at this point because there’s no delineation between moderately sophisticated algorithms and things that are orders of magnitude more complex.

I mean, if something like multisampling came out today we’d all know how it’d be marketed

I just moved and wound up getting an LG C4 65", put off getting internet service, TV worked fine

I’m not in software but from what I read the importer sends a request and that request is used by the exporter and importer to encrypt and decrypt, so I think there’s a way to tweak the whole process a little and instead have both the exporter and importer ask Netflix or whoever to provide a key as opposed to using the request. Could be wrong tho

They behave exactly like black mold. They start coalescing in some adjacent space and suddenly BOOM. Online storefront, starts hosting its own servers, that becomes part of the business. Starts building out warehouses, that becomes part of the business. IoT things that run on their servers, then cameras, gobbles up Blink. They even had a pilot project for restaurant delivery, we’ll probably see that again once they can tie it into their parcel delivery fleet

The shitty thing is that if margins are high enough only a very small minority of owners need to subscribe in order for them to break even and then we get stuck with it for eternity like SiriusXM being implanted into practically everything.

And of course there’s no way to just ‘opt out’ of the hardware via trim levels. Shitty industry in general

That image is of the bus so it probably requires a ‘fleet’ type purchase alongside a maintenance contract

Sometimes a writer will use what they feel is a more recognizable but ‘technically incorrect’ word as a colloquialism for a less-used term that’s more accurate, and then go into more detail in the article, but it’s good and proper to wrap that colloquialism in apostrophes (‘air quotes’).

But in this specific case, it was ruled that Google has a monopoly on general website searches and that they have utilized a variety of anti-competitive practices to bolster their presence as such.

Not dissimilar to Microsoft’s antitrust case in the late 90s, specifically regarding Internet Explorer. It was a very small chunk of a much larger antitrust suit but they were found to have used Windows in order to stifle competition for web browsers and maintain their standing as the dominant browser (they also leveraged their market share for Windows and IE with OEMs and ISPs respectively but I’m digressing).

Microsoft was ordered to split, or spin off their browser business into a different entity, but they settled with DOJ on appeal (probably what we’ll see come of this - Google will probably make a big long list of things they will change or no longer engage in, and the government will feel as though all those changes will be sufficient remedy)

Pretty much.

AI: You don’t have to use plastic! Silicone, graphite, ceramics, glass, woods, and aluminum can all be used as substitutes and often have more desirable physical properties for specific applications.

CEO: I hear you, I really do, but scientists already recommended this and we’ve already done numerous analyses that have all concluded that it’d be too costly to implement and would leave us with products that aren’t competitive.

CEO: …Could you figure out how to increase our gross margins by suggesting changes to these designs?

AI: Sure! We can start by replacing those braze-on threaded nuts with a plastic clamp. I suppose that lag bolt could be plastic as well.

The problem is a confluence of flaws related to capitalism and psychology that allows guys like these to be as they are, gives them ample opportunity to speak, and compels others to listen.

Eric Schmidt and people like him have so much money and influence that they’re presented the opportunity to sit down with policy makers and use media as a megaphone to the point that his voice alone is louder than tens of millions of dissenters and the collective group is able to speak over the entire scientific community.

We’ve normalized it to the point that he can pitch an idea that is as existentially catastrophic as this, and the article writer spins it as some profound statement worthy of deeper discussion.

The CEO of Starbucks attempted to justify flying across state in a jet in order to commute to work, and a lot of people either accept it as some sort of tenet of capitalism or attempt to play the devil’s advocate as to why something like that would be deemed necessary by a person. And while he’s doing that, he’s not univerally lambasted for it, policy doesn’t change to prohibit that, and we just squabble amongst ourselves about the merits or necessity.

But as long as guys like these continue to receive money, they and their lobbyists will be chanting the same mantra

Purely anecdotal but I tend to avoid any sensitive hardware purchases off of Amazon because they suck at packaging things a lot of times and I’ve had more than a few DOA components because they just tossed the box into an even larger box then apparently yeeted it down a flight of stairs

Edit: I should add that I live 10 minutes from a Microcenter which plays a large part in my overall pickiness, but that said, when I’m looking for something sensitive to handling and needs to be purchased online I stick to computer hardware retailers solely because they love packing peanuts and bubble wrap as much as the components love them