QuixoticQuibit

So Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk (and other stupidly rich executives) created hundreds of billions of dollars of value themselves?

Of course not. They got their through exploitation. Any profit that a business has is value not being paid back to the actual workers who created the value of the company through their labor.

Nobody has ever worked for $100 billion. Or $1 billion. Or $100 million.

The recently proposed wealth taxes (e.g., Elizabeth Warren’s proposal) that work the way you’ve described would only start on wealth above $50 million.

So your framing of such a tax as a way to steal from your working-class retirement funds is incredibly disingenuous. Unless, of course, you have 8+ figures of wealth. In which case I hope one day you’re made to pay your fair share to society.

> And the answer is: when the rest of society slows down, suddenly those who couldn’t keep up don’t feel so behind.

Well said. This goes beyond even the socioeconomic causes of suicide that you mentioned and surely includes people with depression, (social) anxiety disorders, etc.

You’re completely missing the point I was making. It’s not about the snarky tweets. It’s about how big and powerful corporations have become.

I don’t know why I’m surprised; HN has shown me more and more that otherwise intelligent people are more than happy to support corporate friendly narratives and anti-progressive ones.

Your implication is that Bezos’ employees were inconsequential to the creation of all that brand new wealth. Surely you don't actually believe that and this is just your ideological rhetoric to further your politicized beliefs?

You’re clearly not being charitable to her if you read her tweet and thought she meant Amazon has to be broken up because their tweets are snarky towards her. She’s saying that Big Tech in general is so powerful—they can do whatever they want—and then snap back at politicians in snarky tweets without a care.

Would be good to elaborate.

Because I don’t use my iPhone like I use my computer (as in desktop experience). Many people like the simple, wall/garden approach to iOS.

I don’t feel like Blind is a good source. Selection bias at play. Especially with disgruntled employees or the ones who only care about optimizing earnings.

Well if you listen to some Tesla fanatics including boss man Elon himself, traditional car companies carry too much baggage from their ICE platforms to transition to EVs successfully, so all this “experience” they have is a net drag.

Meanwhile outside the Tesla/Musk bubble, traditional car companies do not have QC issues like Tesla’s and are even outselling Tesla in major EV markets like Europe.

At least Musk is finally admitting to the QC issues.

L5 under those conditions won’t be achieved in 5 years. Might as well not make the bet.

> According to a source with the Yang campaign, his revamped UBI plan would grant 500,000 New Yorkers in the greatest need an annual $2,000 - $5,000 through a program administered by the city’s Human Resources Administration, the same city agency that administers other benefits programs.

So it’s municipal-level welfare (means tested). Calling it scaled-back UBI is pretty disingenuous. Also, I wonder how well this works at the city level.

You can take the mask off and just say you’re a Trump supporter.

Anyone else who would’ve tweeted the things he has for the past several years would’ve been banned a long time ago.

Blame CDPR’s marketing, not the consumers. Have you seen their marketing efforts recently?

I haven’t read the linked AnandTech article yet, but is there a clear answer why Apple was able to defy common comp arch wisdom (M1 has wider decode which works fine for various applications/code)?

Could you expand on your first paragraph? What would it have meant for them to become a platform? How should they have dominated (sow, sow, sow)?

Im skeptical as well. The primary reason IMO is the software. How do you easily reconfigure your FPGA to efficiently run whatever computationally intensive and/or specialized algorithm you have?

Can you expand on why Intel’s move was smart (what did the Altera acquisition do for them) and why FPGAs have a bright future in the datacenter?

From what little I’ve seen in this space, FPGAs have not made large inroads in the ML space or datacenters in general. This seems partly due to their inefficient nature compared to ASICS and moreover their software.

Unless AMD is planning something really ambitious (e.g., true software-based hardware reconfiguration that doesn’t require HDL knowledge) and are confident they’ve figured it out, I’m not sure what they hope to achieve here.

And yet with our two cameras, we still get into a lot of accidents. Why would we not want to improve upon that with additional sensors like LIDAR?

Not the last two iterations with the X generation design (XS and 11 Pro had feature parity between regular and Max versions).

This feels like an appropriate place to rant on something that’s been bothering me for a while.

It’s really disappointing to me to see every single form of entertainment becoming a subscription service. It’s also the same problem you see with various apps/software trying the SaaS model, even when it doesn’t make sense.

Are we going to have exclusive games requiring multiple subscriptions to enjoy the content you want? Will we move away from being able to purchase games to run them locally?

Moreover, if Games as a Service (GaaS) becomes the de facto way to release games, is it going to encourage longer titles with lots of grinding/farming to ensure people stay engaged for months at a time? Will it slowly kill off sub-20h, more story-focused experiences that can be completed in a fraction of one month’s subscription price?

Also, it really bothers me to see that almost every single one of the FAANGs feels the need hop on the bandwagon. First it was music streaming, then movies/TVs, and now it looks like gaming is next. You can argue that competition is good but really we just have exclusive content siloed across various services and priced in such a way that likely only the large tech companies can subside it with their other offerings (e.g., ad revenue or premium phone sales).

Musk said the same thing years ago. He’s a chronic liar and/or an over-promising, under-delivering salesman.

I don’t see how $10/mo is at all profitable with them adding all these AAA games to it.

I don’t disagree with you, but I see it two ways:

1. The continued conglomeratization in the tech sector is a worrying trend as we see fewer and fewer small players.

2. Only a large-ish company could provide effective competition in the CPU/ISA/architecture space against the current x86 duopoly.

Look at their AI/CUDA documentation and associated githubs. Many of their tools and libraries are open source.

Tell me, what other AI platform works with x86 and PowerPC and ARM? Currently NVIDIA’s GPUs do.

NVIDIA’s hardware works on x86, PowerPC, and ARM platforms.

Many of their AI libraries/tools are in fact open source.

They stand to be a force that could propel ARM’s strength in data center and desktop computing. For some reason you’re okay with the current x86 duopoly held by AMD and Intel, both who have their own destiny over CPUs and GPUs.

The HN crowd is incredibly biased against certain companies. Why not look at some of the potential bright sides to this for a more nuanced and balanced opinion?

HN being hyperbolic and anti-NVIDIA as usual. I think this is a great thing. Finally a competitor to the AMD-Intel x86 duopoly. I imagine the focus will first be on improving ARM’s data center offerings but eventually I’m hoping to see consumer-facing parts available sometime as well.

Does Nvidia have a history of doing this?

People here have an axe to grind against Nvidia it seems. Somehow seen as Intel but for GPUs despite being highly innovative and continuously so.

And yet they have the longest software support for smartphones in the industry by a large margin. Plus they offer consumers the ability to replace the battery for a fee.