They sure the LLM didn’t just mis-count the inventory?

I feel like based on recent articles, Microsoft has shed 746% of its workforce over the past 2 years.

I think I get it now. “The year of Linux on the desktop” doesn’t refer to a specific calendar year. Its just how long it takes them to do it.

This is an example of competition working. Normally, an oligopolistic market like this would not have good faith competition, but Valve got rich before they could be corrupted by VC, so they obey the intentions of one crazy entrepreneur, instead of the normal undifferentiated VC behavior.

Steam’s competitors keep trying the VC strategy and it can’t work because Steam exists and, at least while Newell maintains this attitude and control of Valve, don’t do it.

The people that care leave or are forced out. Like it or not, Reddit belongs to a company. If they want to make their thing into a pile of junk, that sucks and is a shame, but its theirs to ruin. Feel free not to take the abuse.

Those are among the plenty that are in the public interest. The whole Information Age would be practically impossible without them. In fact, distributing them would probably make them less efficient.

LLM data centers are the ones that are all the rage lately, and the ones most often being designed using environmentally irresponsible and wasteful technologies, then lobbying for extremely favorable utility rates, foisting the costs on the locals. They’re so far at the forefront of the media that many people think these are the only kind there are.

Those are just YouTube clients, though. The 1st-party YouTube client apps are pretty widely regarded as crappy, but they are far from the main problem. The YouTube content and its distribution are almost totally unmatched and almost certainly operate at a loss. Google is uniquely willing and able to operate it that way because it adds more value to their other business units than it costs them.

I think worth and cash flow are too loosely correlated for that to work how youre intending. I’m all for punitive fines for corporate malfeasance, but if they’re based on worth only, a company could easily become insolvent even from fines that aren’t intended to be fatal to them.

If it is based off their cash flow instead and potentially distributed over a period of time, it can do multiple good things at once: force the company to literally pay for the harms it caused, damage their operations enough to financially discourage the behavior, and keep corporate behavior in line through examples without frequently disrupting markets by unduly bankrupting companies.

If a company does end up doing something so bad that it is unforgivable and irreparable, and it’s deemed worthy of destroying them or punishing those responsible directly, I can see the reasoning for that, too. But, I think it would work best if the punishments are dialed in to have the desired result as often as possible. Allowing the possibility of offenders correcting course seems better for everyone while still allowing any victims to get justice.

They aren’t inherently bad, but they are bad when not used and built in the public interest on a planet with runaway greenhouse gas emissions and collapsing ecology.

If someone ever brings up one of those data centers, we can talk about their good aspects. There definitely are plenty, but I don’t think the poster was talking about those.

I think you might be pleasantly surprised to find that if we all just collectively agreed not to do a lot of that paperwork, absolutely nothing bad would happen.

I have worked for more than one company that had paperwork requirements that, once traced down, had their causes and effects commingled and were a self-perpetuating problem that was causing itself.

Surely some paperwork and documentation is important and serves a purpose that justifies the nuisance, but a good deal of it does not, and it could simply disappear if we could dispense with our collective obsession to document irrelevant information simply because it exists.

They’re an embodiment of the tragedy of the commons. Businesses glut up the public spaces beyond their intended capacity and for unintended uses, then do or pay nothing for the degradation they cause.

Joke’s on them. All the public funds got used up on the last “too big to fail” bailout.

There won’t be any money left that isn’t trapped in the Nvidia > AI companies > Nvidia loop if it goes that long.

I believe that most of the customers signing these agreements are also the ones responsible for the memory shortage in the first place, and will go bankrupt when the AI bubble bursts, so the contracts will be voided in bankruptcy court.

I wish it were true. For me and I’m sure others, leisure activity must be planned, scheduled in advance, and coordinated with several people. Even then, it is not uncommon for it to be interrupted.

I find it strange how many people find it unbelievable that there are people much busier than themselves that do not have time for impromptu leisure activity. I feel like I’m being punked.

Agreed, but I already watch maybe 1 hour of TV per week, and wouldn’t even have one if I didn’t have kids. Trust me, I’ve already looked for low-hanging fruit; I do not love being this busy.

I dont think its at all productive for us to compare responsibilities and measure. I invite you to consider that the level of responsibility in one’s life varies a great deal from one person to the next, even within the same demographic group.

In your own post you stated that you never had a time where you couldn’t game without prioritizing it, and in my post I stated nearly the opposite. Either one of us is lying, we have a very different baseline level of “priority” for gaming, or we lead different lives in which mine is busier than yours.

People often are dismissive of people’s responsibilities they have no way of knowing and offer the empty platitude, “You have to make time for what’s important to you,” but it is just that, a platitude. Everyone experiences a finite amount of time, and it absolutely can all get used up on critical things before leisure things can be considered. I know I personally have many important things I’d very much love to stop leaving idle, but there are, quite literally, not enough hours in the day. As I’ve aged I’ve gone from needing 4 hours of sleep to at least 6, for example. That’s 2 hours per day that are simply deleted from my calendar. Once you get to 24 hours, there’s no more hours.

That whole line of thinking seems to me to be in the same family of thought as blaming poor people for not working more or harder-- it ignores a mountain of circumstances that make that impossible or irrelevant.

Exactly, thank you. Of course I could prioritize gaming over nearly anything, but no reasonable person would for important things. I guess I have more things I feel are important going on than this guy and some others find believable. I assure you, I am not making up a story to earn fake Internet points that could not have less meaning.

I am using that word as follows:

Prioritize: to adjust the priority ranking of something to a higher level than it was previously.

not

Prioritize: to assign something the highest priority.

Maybe I am using the word wrong, but I believe both definitions to be valid. Sorry for the confusion.

What I meant was that I do not have anything on my docket that I think a reasonable person would demote in priority to make room for gaming. That day may come, but it has not for many years now. You may be surprised how wildly varied people’s level of responsibility is and how busy that makes them.