bryanlarsen

It's interesting how many of these issues don't appear to be specific to the DGX Spark but to the standard "Nvidia GPUs suck on Linux" type of issues that afflict a lot of people.

good relationships with family and friends are highly correlation with happiness,

And disputes over money are the most common way to break up a family. Probably friends too.

related: https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/contra-pritchard-on-liberal...

100 square kilometers sounds like a big area. And it is, in continental Europe or in an urban area. In Montana, it's enough space for a few hundred cows. In desert regions, it's worth even less. You can buy 100 square kilometres of unserviced desert land for ~$10M.

Space data centers require hundreds of daily launches. Disney and the massive industries around Canaveral will NIMBY it hard.

The local hospital had 2 nurses who committed suicide during COVID. Nursing attracts high compassion individuals and then overworks them so that they cannot provide a proper level level of care. Add the stress of a demanding physical job and the stress of shift work and you end up with one of the professions with the highest female suicide rates.

I think schools have been courting male teachers for quite a while now.

And according to the article, this courting of male nurses has also been going on for many years.

I think what would help a lot would be a strong male nurse as a lead in a medical television drama. We've had strong male nurses in secondary characters, but not as leads or co-leads.

A sexy male nurse should appeal quite strongly to the traditional medical drama audience; it'd let a studio follow the traditional formula but be enough of a change that it's not a rehash.

Nintendo Switch pricing increases $50 September 1. It only has 1/4 of the RAM of the Deck, so it's not hit as bad.

Saying that the US and China are currently the same is admitting defeat and giving up the fight before the fight has actually been lost.

The main advantage of offshore power is the reliability of the wind. For example, on the North Sea the wind blows strong enough for power generation 80% of the time.

The East coast of the US has similar trade winds.

That you can freely talk about nspm-7 on an American forum without fear of being disappeared shows that America and China are not at the same level.

Yet.

And xennials had access to same dynamic. Xennials houses were more expensive than boomer houses, but they were also much larger and financed more cheaply. Once you make those two adjustments, those who bought their house around the turn of the millennium were the ones who got the most value in terms of house payment as fraction of income, and who experienced the most appreciation the most quickly. And in 2000, it was Gen-X buying their first home, not boomers. (a very brief moment post-crash was even better).

It's young adults that are getting screwed. Xennials are no longer young adults.

P.S. I bought my first house in 2001 at the age of 28. In hindsight I got super lucky and timed it perfectly. I bought it the month I paid off my student loans, which took me ~4 years of accelerated payments.

cents per billion is only 3 orders of magnitude reduction in cost. I can see 6 or so happening in the next decade or so.

1. Like any commodity, I expect the price to converge to the marginal cost. The marginal cost is the price of electricity which is currently 10% or so of the cost of inference.

2. I expect the cost of electricity to go down an order of magnitude. Solar power and batteries are getting cheaper fast.

3. As the price of electricity starts dominating costs, you can drastically reduce costs by by taking advantage of electricity price variations. Build data centers all around the world and answer requests from the part of the world where the sun is shining.

4. Moore's law

5. Algorithm improvements

6. Moving from general purpose chips to chips that are highly optimized for inference.

Mortgage rates in the late 80s were well over double what they were post-crash. For a 25 year mortgage, twice the mortgage rate means about double the payments.

I'd definitely take the other side of that bet. Xennials are significantly richer today than boomers were 25 years ago, generally own their house and have a 401K or similar.

Xennials have benefitted from the same forces that made the boomers rich. They're not young adults.

Xennials were at prime house buying age when houses were really cheap after the 2008 housing crash.

People wouldn't be willing to pay the extra amount if it was cheaper at the store across the street.

But the store across the street also has to pay the interchange fee, so they're not cheaper.

Weren't there a bunch of houses available for $500 in Detroit 20 years ago?

In Canada, second houses and vacant houses are taxed higher than primary residences.

If rich people can't buy luxury housing, they buy non-luxury housing, driving up its price. If you don't want rich people driving up the price of affordable housing, make sure there is lots of luxury housing available so they don't drive up the price of the cheap stuff.

Which happens for every new technology. Blue LED's in everything, capacitive buttons on everything, car buttons replaced with ipads, et cetera. Some of the random placements will prove out useful but most won't and will disappear.

Quite regularly I see people on HN post their alternatives to LinkedIn and all the other locked-in modern 3 sided marketplaces that are blights on the modern world.

And they all have the same problem LinkedIn has -- they don't fix the core incentive issues.

Because you know if any LinkedIn alternative ever becomes popular at some point they'll perform a rug pull to turn popularity into massive profit.

But they won't become popular because they first have to solve the trust issue.

And the trust issue is foundational. And has a solution -- it should be a non-profit and/or consumer co-op and/or producer co-op.

Which likely means it needs to be formed in Europe or Canada or someplace without the anti-co-op laws of the US that make it difficult for co-ops to raise capital.

And founders will have to be satisfied with solid six figure salaries instead of their dreams of becoming a billionaire.

If an elderly but distinguished scientist says that something is possible, he is almost certainly right; but if he says that it is impossible, he is very probably wrong.

- Arthur C Clarke

Sturgeon's Law (90% of everything is crud) applies more than ever in the age of AI.

The best filter is time -- the cream does eventually rise to the top. And conveniently the time filter also excludes AI slop.

False equivalence is what enabled the Trump presidency. "All politicians are corrupt liars, therefore we'll elect the one who tells us the lies we like".

Corruption and evil are not binary, they're shades of grey. Trump might be bad, but he's not poisoning his opponents or throwing them out windows.

If all politicians are evil, the goal should be to elect the least-evil one.

Presumably, but exactly the sort of project where slopware is appropriate. Nobody is expected to use it.

The problem with Democrats is that they believe in too many things, not that they believe in only stability.

You can find a Democrat on both sides of every issue. It's a big tent party, and houses a lot of oddballs.

It's a reply to OP's "for about a decade".

In 2022 we still had ZIRP, so a P/E of 34 was relatively low. (Interest rates are E/P for cash).

He's not even a trillionaire with a free float of 5%. Now that SPCX has almost returned to IPO prices, Elon is "only" worth $0.9T.

always win

That's not true. It's only been true on American stock markets, and we only have ~100 years of data.

Many other major stock markets in the world have had ~20 year periods where you would have been better off with your money in bonds than in stocks.

I think the average world stock market is a much better predictor of American stock markets over the next 100 years than past performance of American stock markets. The last 100 years have been exceptional for America vs the world -- it seems very likely that the next 100 years won't be.

The most extreme example is Germany 1914. If you would have invested in the German stock market in 1914 it would have taken you 100 years to break even. I'm not saying that American stock markets will be that bad, but it's an example that disproves the thesis that long term stock markets always win.