xeox538

Very interesting software. I would love it to have nix integration for systemd-nspawn or microvm. Would definitely try it out.

I believe we're currently seeing AI in the "mainframe" era, much like the early days of computing, where a single machine occupied an entire room and consumed massive amounts of power, yet offered less compute than what now fits in a smartphone.

I expect rapid progress in both model efficiency and hardware specialization. Local inference on edge devices, using chips designed specifically for AI workloads, will drastically reduce energy consumption for the majority of tasks. This shift will free up large-scale compute resources to focus on truly complex scientific problems, which seems like a worthwhile goal to me.

Well, maybe when the next pandemic hits, there will be no more remote work. Since you do not believe it is an option, if it worked then, why wouldn’t it work now?

30 years running now, but probably would run another 20. Does this count?

https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/infrastructure/a...

The same could be said about a person stabbing someone to death. You could call it a incident. But if there was a clear intent it is called murder. Definition do matter. In above example you could argue a judge first has to declare someone guilty and I agree. In this particular case I "beleive" it is a statistically unrealistic scenario to not rule out bad intent. Thus fitting the definition. It is not about a matter of opinion, it is purely stating the fact of the act fitting the description of terrorism which I would argue isnt subjected to semantics of the vague aspects of the definition. Murder is still murder no matter who dun it.

Ok perhaps I did, maybe I was wrong with the example of the bbc. Other news outlets consistently make use of superlatives and after browsing other articles I must admit I didnt find any on their site. And with my initial post I didnt say they condoned it. I said it is almost like they condone it. These carefull use of words where to have the possibility of saving face and it is the same for journalism. Fact is most countries have defined Hamas as a terrorist organisation as is the UK even before these events. These events fit the general definition of terrorism is it not? I understand they are also more carefull now with their words because of the fine balance. I only argue I see it differently and contest their frame.

People taking a stance based on presented facts of having a opinion based on them because of complete or incomplete information also fine. But it defeats the purpose of having the definition in the first place. I am referring to the using violence against non-combatants mostly civilians with the aim of spreading fear. Never have I said anything of being pro whomever, only condemming the act with the intention of spreading fear. Just like there is fear of US dropping bombs on afgan houses as it is to having planes flying into buildings. It is the behavior not the party who does it.

I dont care who does it. It fits the definition. So actually it is a stance of the BBC not to condem it. It alsmost is like they condone it now.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism

The spokesman of the ACM just told om national tv that Apple tried to keep it silent by going to court, and luckily the judge denied the request. Yet another dick move of Apple vs open market competition.