ccgreg

Do you have some reading for this? I've used that compiler but I never read the resulting assembly language.

The EHT black hole telescope is an example of VLBI.

Insanely expensive for that performance. I was the architect of HPC clusters in that era, and Itanic never made it to the top for price per performance.

Also, having lived through the software stack issues with the first beta chips of Itanic and AMD64 (and MIPS64, but who's counting), AMD64 was way way more stable than the others.

> Our observations also highlight the vital role of open data initiatives like Common Crawl. Unlike commercial crawlers, Common Crawl makes its data freely available to the public, helping create a more inclusive ecosystem for AI research and development. With coverage across 63% of the unique websites crawled by AI bots, substantially higher than most commercial alternatives, it plays a pivotal role in democratizing access to large-scale web data. This open-access model empowers a broader community of researchers and developers to train and improve AI models, fostering more diverse and widespread innovation in the field.

...

> What’s notable is that the top four crawlers (Meta, Google, OpenAI and Claude) seem to prefer Commerce websites. Common Crawl’s CCBot, whose open data set is widely used, has a balanced preference for Commerce, Media & Entertainment and High Tech sectors. Its commercial equivalents Timpibot and Diffbot seem to have a high preference for Media & Entertainment, perhaps to complement what’s available through Common Crawl.

And also there's one final number that isn't in the Fastly report but is in the EL Reg article[2]:

> The Common Crawl Project, which slurps websites to include in a free public dataset designed to prevent duplication of effort and traffic multiplication at the heart of the crawler problem, was a surprisingly-low 0.21 percent.

1: https://learn.fastly.com/rs/025-XKO-469/images/Fastly-Threat...

2: https://www.theregister.com/2025/08/21/ai_crawler_traffic/

But as for the crawl loophole: CCBot obeys robots.txt, and CCBot also preserves all robots.txt and REPL signals so that downstream users can find out if a website intended to block them at crawl time.

Where does it say there is zero iron? This is an upper bound, not zero.

Sadly misunderstood by a bunch of people.

This isn't true, and I can't imagine that any lawyer would agree with this statement. CCF does not have rights ownership of any of the bytes of our crawl, so we cannot grant you any rights for the bytes in our crawl. Nothing that we could say could have any relationship to this legal issue.

Last time I was architect of a network chip, 21 years ago, our library did that for the user. For workloads that use threads that consume entire cores, it's a solved problem.

I'd guess that the workload you had in mind doesn't have that property.