tempeler

A crisis is when money flow stops in the market. In The Big Short, he bet on the fact that cash flow would stop, and they won. The stock market works in a similar way to a company’s cash flow. When money is pumped into a stock, its value increases; when money is pulled out, the value drops.

The news is essentially about making a bet, as the title suggests, with no real evidence or information on who will pull the money out or how it will happen. Just because the price is high doesn’t necessarily mean there will be an outflow. It’s more like gambling, based on speculation rather than solid facts.

Eventually, I’ll have a fancy business card like Paul Allen’s!

To support open source projects and developers, a GitHub-like platform managed by a nonprofit organization should be established, and it should issue its own token. Similarly, a fair system that distributes these tokens according to developers’ contributions would be much more appropriate.

In knowledge-based white-collar work, there has been a significant increase in productivity in recent times. Tasks that once took days or even weeks—such as research, content creation, and visual generation—can now be completed within minutes. At the same time, both the speed of production and the quality of output are continuously improving. The outcomes are unavoidable.

The accuracy of this comparison is highly speculative. One should not ignore the possibility that dominant firms in the market might be inflating their cost figures to block new entrants and extract more capital from investors through such narratives. When you compare electricity prices in China with those in the U.S., such a large gap would require a truly extraordinary breakthrough to be justified.After all, these are privately held commercial firms, and they are not obligated to disclose their financials accurately.

To defend yourself against those who don't play by the rules. it has to be democratized. The world isn’t a fair place.

This idea does not belong to me. If lawmakers and regulators allow companies to use these IPs, how can you keep ordinary people away from them? Something created by AI is regarded as if it was created from scratch by human hands. that's reality.

I think, A new chapter is about to begin. It seems that in the future, many IPs will become democratized — in other words, they will become public assets.

risc-v is much more reasonable for countries like china.What I want to emphasize is this: Instead of paying license fees for outdated x86 architectures, it would be much more beneficial to allocate those resources to universities. If you're paying for a license but can't generate a return on that investment quickly, then something is wrong.

Rather than signaling AMD's bankruptcy, this could be seen as a strong indication of how heavily China is investing in legacy technologies. That's why I wouldn't be so quick to draw conclusions. China’s eagerness in this area doesn’t mean that the investments are efficient. What truly matters here is the ability to build a full ecosystem. They practically wiped Huawei off the global smartphone market simply by banning Google services on their devices.

it seems bad investment. firstly, it's an old architecure. secondly, How will they measure the efficiency of their investments?.Instead of investing in outdated architectures, they could fund universities, or support at least two or more companies in a competitive setup — that way, something much more efficient might emerge. But when a company is state-funded in a monopolistic way, it's quite hard for it to succeed. The U.S. had a reason for supporting AMD against Intel back then.

Built a small tool that lets you categorize your local PDFs by local llms. tweaking prompt you can get better results.

Consciousness, at its simplest, is awareness of a state or object either internal to oneself or in one's external environment.

AI research is centered on implementing human thinking patterns in machines. While human thought processes can be replicated, claiming that consciousness and energy awareness cannot be similarly emulated in machines does not seem like a reasonable argument.

I know this movie very well from somewhere, but the ending is both unhappy and bad. But you are lucky, it does not last longer than 4 years.

We consider the human brain and thought structure to be close to perfect. In fact, we know that it can be easily deceived or misled. It can make wrong decisions because it is very easy to fall into cognitive errors. We are trying to copy this structure in developing artificial intelligence. That is why it seems very common for it to hallucinate or give wrong answers. When the reasons that cause people to make wrong decisions are eliminated, maybe what artificial intelligence gives in the same way can be much more realistic and accurate. Maybe then we can talk about Artificial General Intelligence. They use it very easily. That is why it does not seem possible to predict in the future whether humans will fix artificial intelligence or artificial intelligence will change our thought structure.

They made a discount; it's very impressive; they probably found a very efficient way, so it's discounted. I guess there's no need to build a very large nuclear power plant or a $9 trillion chip factory to run a single large language model. Efficiency has skyrocketed, or thanks to competition, OpenAI's all problems were solved.

Some benefits of US sanctions. The only way for China to spread in the West or non-West is to be open source. US monopolies may prevent competition in the US, but I don't think other countries would be willing to join in. They are actually doing a favor for the rest of the world. Will open source become cheap hardware thanks to the hardware wars? Are they trying to make everyone dependent on China by being paranoid like this? What are they doing? The US is going in the wrong direction. The inefficient ones should say goodbye to the market and continue with the efficient ones. They seem to be going after the monopolies and bringing about their own end.

On another subject, if it belongs to OpenAI because it uses OpenAI, then doesn't that mean that everything produced using OpenAI belongs to OpenAI? Isn't that a reason not to use OpenAI? It's very similar to saying that you used Google and searched; now this product belongs to Google. They couldn't figure out how to respond; they went crazy.

I'm not sure it's planned or not. Finally, Chinese are generally proud of 4 great inventions. one of compass, another one of gonpower. Despite this, I still can't understand why they didn't think of starting geographical exploration and colonization. So I don't know what kind of agenda they have. But I do know one thing: except for China and the US, no one cares who the product comes from. If it's cheap or free, they use it, and no one cares. No one apologizes to the US for losing monopolies.

In the end, he is a very good dealer. He already got his packet. From now on, it's OpenAI's investors' problem. not him.

Deepseek is not hardware; how could it hurt NVidia? It's found a way to use train data efficiently, but it seems DeepSeeks brings more potential customers to them. It's open a way for small enterprises and individuals. I have lost faith that AMD will fight back against Nvidia. If Apple or another RISC-V-based LLM accelerator hardware manufacturer doesn't respond to NVIDIA, NVIDIA will drive hardware prices skyrocketing, as any monopoly does. It looks like Apple is the one with the most potential to give the answer that will hurt Nvidia.

This is an open-source tool. You can train and shape it however you want. You can teach it to behave like an SS soldier; you are free to do whatever you want. No one limits you. People forget that, or they bring their agendas. Therefore, no one cares what the other political views are; I can train it whatever I want.

Pricing is the betting or wishing in the valuation. The buyer thinks it will increase; the seller thinks it's enough. No one knows what will happen in the future. Maybe the Fed will print too much money. Does anyone know what will happen in the future?

People do not understand. If you want to make money in the stock market, find growing companies. Pricing of the growing companies is different from others. Since it is not clear when the growth will end, there is a high probability that there will be extreme things in pricing. Since they are market leadership and can lead the price. Don't compare growing companies with others. That's a big fallacy. Their price always overshooted. I don't have any investments in Nvidia, but reality is that. This is why economists always talk about growth.

First of all, I don't invest in Nvidia and like Olygopols. But it is too early to talk about Nvidia's future. People are just betting and wishing about Nvidia's future. No one knows people's what people will do in the future. what they will think? It's just guessing and betting. Their real competitor is not Deepseek. Did AMD or others release something new and compete with Nvidia's products? If NVDIA will be the market leader, this means they will lead the price. Being Olygopol is something like that. They don't need to compete for the price of competitors.

You believe your llm are alive or not trained by a human. You do not look at it realistically. Do you think llm will you teach or find a way to crime? According to your idea, it should have no censorship; it has to do. I don't trust any human-made stuff. No one has the liability to tell the truth.

This is just a machine trained by humans. What you expected that? Do you think it teaches you a way to commit crime or something else? Do you think you can talk freely about everything in here? Will they allow that? Your nonsense question is about politics or gossiping with a machine, not people's problems, and no one cares.

People really are really interesting. They want to argue with a machine about political issues or try to gossip with a llm. It doesn't show that you are very democratic. It shows that you are too lonely or have mental illness. I don't understand people's motivations doing about that. Second, no one cares about your political ideas.

If your product is related to media (news, magazines, etc.), that's really good for you. because you got the people's attention. This is an assertive headline. but if you claim your product is better or equivalent to them. if your product does not meet your claims. This is not good for your product. They just try once and send it to trash urgently. Also, you lose potential users. The main issue here is user trust, not how your competitor is big.

LLMs without agendas are dangerous for believers, politicians, clergy, and swindlers. These groups usually tell stories; their audience listens to them without any question or verification. LLMs without agendas: users usually ask-prompt to llms. People who ask-demand are dangerous for the group that I mentioned above. More questions bring more suspects.Also, they want to verify it. Knowledge and experience make the people free. How will they be able to continue their work? if llms with an agenda can also be dangerous. because if the people begin to ask the question... some people won't like this.