cthalupa

If it frees humans up to pursue whatever we desire instead of having to work to generate more value for someone else than myself, then I'm happy.

Now obviously, hell is more likely than a utopia, but this is the sort of advancement that would be required for us to reach that point. Something has to do the work.

Obviously there were plays from the dotcom era that just were not going to work on the timeframes expected because the rest of the infrastructure also hadn't caught up - not just internet, but shipping in general took a long time to catch up, and Amazon having to basically build their own logistics empire shows that ecommerce just wasn't going to be able to be The Thing at the speed those investments required.

But let's say you invested in the NASDAQ at it's peak during the bubble - late 2010s you're whole, inflation adjusted. Obviously, not ideal, but a decade and a half isn't the worst turnaround to make your money back if you just sit. Lots of trades that have gone far, far, far worse.

Smartphones overtook regular cell phones ~2013-2014 as the majority of owned cell phones in the US.

But the NASDAQ started on clear trajectory up and up since 08, several years before smartphones became big.

Smartphones accelerated it, but obviously the internet was going to keep growing and growing and everyone could see where it was heading well before smartphones. A huge amount of the value generated by the internet is on the business side. The amount of productivity from making it basically frictionless to collaborate from anywhere in the world is hard to understate.

Yes. This idea that there's some third option, where you just uh.... spend all your life grinding hard to someday maybe make it big while sacrificing all of the other stuff you might otherwise enjoy in life. Because, you know, you're some third other option that doesn't care about the stuff alpha and beta males care about.

It is exactly as dumb as you are fearing.

I'm not able to view the video, but based on the description, I don't know that it's relevant - I'm not claiming testimony isn't evidence, because it very clearly is?

My comment is almost entirely about the court of public opinion side of things, though, not what happens in the courts themselves - because the topic is about a list as an alternative to the prosecution of these people.

I mean, I'd argue that one party pretty expressly wants to protect the interests of these people. Largely the one that has been sitting on the Epstein lists despite campaigning on releasing them. Meanwhile, I can go read hundreds of pages of investigation on Clinton getting a blowjob. And yeah, he's a scumbag for that too, obvious power imbalance, etc., but it's pretty telling what gets released and what doesn't. I'd also argue there's one side that just generally gives less of a fuck about the rights of women.

But yes, if we could actually make going to the police an effective, safe, and as painless as can be process for the victims, it would solve a whole whole lot of this, and we really could go 'well why are you putting it on a list instead of going to the police and getting the scumbag put behind bars,' whereas there's a billion and a half legitimate reasons someone might not want to go to the police today.

Because rent is expensive and options are limited, we've promoted the sigma grindset culture to an insane degree, and people like to cluster together socially, especially when doing something that scares them, like trying to launch a startup. Save on money, be around people experiencing the same things you are, potentially be able to collaborate if you end up working on the same thing, etc.

... but yes it's still weird from an objective standpoint and only makes sense when you insert yourself into the bizzaro world bubble of SV.

> These things can all be true, sure. What’s also true is what the GP points out: the only time the preemptive doubt rolls out is for accusations of sexual impropriety, which can’t be disentangled from the fact that most accusations against the powerful of sexual impropriety come from women.

Sure. But there's a variety of tones discussing this - there are some that are quite expressly political in nature of a certain bent, and those I would be skeptical of. There's more than one comment in here that gives me the ick. But that's not everyone, and lumping them in together isn't productive.

> And given how abysmally low the rate of false allegations is maybe we should all do a bit better and stop running interference for our oligarch class, especially since sexual impropriety seems to be how they operate in a lot of domains, not just with adult women.

How low do you think the rate is? Because its' hard to pin down, but ~10% seems to be a pretty defensible number based on the data we do have. That's definitely a minority, but 10% is enough that I am going to consider it every time. If 1 out of 10 times I lit my stove it would explode if not examined, I am still checking my stove every single time I use it.

I don't disagree that we have a lot of sick fuck oligarchs. I don't disagree that sexual assault is one of the things the ultra rich and powerful turn to for a variety of reasons.

But a rational position is a rational position. I'm not going to abandon it because some people will misuse it to cast aspersions on people. I don't think women are inherently more moral than men, and we have many many many examples of men using deception to harm others for their own advantage. I don't think women are incapable of doing the same.

I would also never suggest that the default is to assume every accusation is a lie. My general assumption is that any given accusation is probably true, but that if you're going to have an opinion on which way the outcome is, it's best to have as informed of an opinion as you can, rather than just assuming anything one way or the other. And in a court of law, presumed innocent, because that's a whole different thing than public opinion.

Yes, all false accusations are bad.

But sexual assault is the one area that is almost always taking two parties at their word, and very very frequently, the only court is the court of public opinion. That makes it rife for abuse in both directions - people doing it believing they'll get away with it because it comes down to their word vs. someone else's if it ever even comes out, since so few people go to the police, and people know they can lob an accusation out there and do a lot of damage without having to prove anything.

I think the former happens far far more than the latter, but I'm also not going to wonder why people discuss the latter - it's real, and it happens. People discuss getting attacked by sharks whenever sharks come up, too, even though that's almost certainly not going to be something they need to worry about, either.

This sort of list is exactly the sort of place where those false accusations can be really easily inserted with minimal vetting. I'd also bet it is an almost entirely accurate list.

All these things can be true at once.

I have been attempting to get on the $200 sub for a while. It was not available for me a few days ago, and checking again now, it is still not available.

I'm going based off of set standards, not local. Plenty of international organizations track this and even before you replied to me here there were other links in the thread. But the absolute numbers aren't important either way, it's the trends. I don't care if it's the 25kg mark they're passing or the 30kg, and the numbers I'm basing this off of predate GLP-1 medications. What I care about is the trends for weight - and in Korea, just like everywhere else in the developed world, those trends were rising, and accelerating at the rate at which they rose.

As for Japan, uh, I love Japan, but you have a.... very interesting... view of it. No litter? Walk off the main streets, go down some back alleys. Tokyo is a big city. Japanese people aren't so inhuman compared to the rest of the world as to be perfect. Hell, go have some great craft beer at the Mikkeller bar in Shibuya or literally anything down one of those alleys. You'll find trash, you'll find garbage sitting out, you'll see rats. New Yorkers will stop feeling so claustrophobically clean and start feeling at home.

You're right about DEI, but it's also one of the most homogeneous cultures in the world, the poor treatment of women in the workforce for so long directly lead to a backlash that has precipitated and massively contributed their birth rate issues, and racism against people of Korean descent is still massive.

And the entire salaryman system is literally a "the vast majority of you will get promoted in near lockstep for time served" celebration of mediocrity.

Japan is a wonderful country. There's plenty of things they do better than anyone else. There's plenty of things they are awful at or about, too. Go look at their legal system - they have an absurd conviction rate of nearly 100%. And it's not because they're doing that much better of a job investigating, or having better prosecution, or only charge people they've got definitive proof. And there's a million things they are just as bad at.

Korea is just a perfect counterexample because they also are huge on accountability and personal responsibility, the cleanliness level is similar to Japan, they don't have DEI, and they celebrate mediocrity far less than Japan does.... and yet, still getting fat.

I can't explain Japan. But the explanations people give always have plenty of counterexamples.

Japan is literally the only country in the developed world that doesn't see their trends following the path of America. Even culturally similar countries like Korea are seeing a rise in overweight and obesity similar to the trends that happened in America and other countries in the west. And Korea has one of the largest shame-industrial-complexes around people being fat, with it being the norm for everyone from your friends and family to strangers pointing out the fact that you're overweight, one of the most insane beauty industries in the world, a 'show up and get GLP-1 medications same day' complex that puts America's compounding industry to shame when it comes to ease of access, etc.

If other countries avoid getting as fat as America was at her fattest, it will be because of GLP-1 medications, not because they are morally superior with a better work ethic.

I would agree that they very much had business decisions around the fork - but calling them malicious is bizarre.

They used the software in a way that complied with the license. When the license changed to no longer suit them for future releases, they forked from the original license.

Remove the names here, and in context, every single person familiar with open source projects and licensing would think this is a nonissue. They used the software as the license was intended, and exercised the rights given to them by that license. That freedom to fork if they don't like where the project is going, or things change and the project is no longer viable for them with the new license, is one of the key freedoms enshrined in the whole FOSS movement.

Except this entire narrative is thrown off by the fact that obesity has been a problem before any of that and is a problem in countries without any of that. Even places like Korea where you are literally shamed constantly by friends and family for being even remotely overweight has obesity growing all while having basically the exact opposite culture of what you are complaining about.

Basically the only developed country where overweight and obesity have stayed flat is Japan.

> So has anyone managed to separate the effects of semaglutide from the effects of weight loss?

In general? Yes. For this specific thing? We haven't even really shown the effects matter for humans.

> If this is caused by the weight loss, it is a little disappointing that public health didn't act quicker - lots of people have been overweight for a century now, so literally 10's of millions of people could have been saved from dementia had action been taken 100 years ago.

Public health has been banging the drum on obesity for decades now. But humans on the whole aren't built to be able to resist hyper palatable calorie dense cheap foods.

Making this argument is a strong indicator that you are extremely under-educated on this subject or motivated to make dishonest arguments.

There are a variety of commercial reactor design families that CANNOT melt down. Literally impossible for have a Chernobyl or Fukushima from the designs. These are not new. There is no reason anyone feeling like they know enough to contribute to this sort of discussion should be unaware. HTGRs, MSRs, SMRs, LMRs, SFRs...

"Sometimes nuclear plants melt down and cause widespread problems for very long timescales" is a nonsense argument to use against "We should build new reactors" when the new reactor designs we would be building can't melt down.

I love Japan. I love Tokyo.

But go look at the conviction rate in Japan - it's not because their police are just so much better than ours that they just never get the wrong person. I would never argue for the Japanese legal and police system in America.

Just google 'mortality data statins' and there's a mountain of it.

5 years studies show minimal or no benefit for people in low-risk groups. High-risk groups see significant benefit Follow up/longer term studies show increased benefit in low-risk groups but obviously not matching the high risk groups.

VLDL is worse than regular LDL but high LDL in general is an issue. The science here isn't "If your LDL is denser everything is just peachy and you can be fine with 100 LDL," it's "You might be anywhere between significantly worse and marginally better than your numbers suggest"

If your LDL is in the 80s, you are almost certainly progressing plaque buildup regardless of all other factors. It won't be particularly fast in most people, maybe not even enough to matter over your lifespan unless you have other risk factors. If everything is favorable, you might see a halt or slow regression in the 70s, but this is like perfect storm levels of factors.

Most people need to be below 60 to start see soft plaque begin to retreat, with under 55 being the general target for high-risk individuals that need regression.

Your endo is right that basically no one gets there without some form of medication. It sucks, but it's also reality.

> my dentist, who also has a bit of a fixation on cholesterol on a personal level and is educated on the matter, has said that a heart calcium scan is the best way to determine what someone's target cholesterol number should actually be, and that it should not be the same from person to person.

Your dentist is an idiot and very much obviously not educated on the matter and should stick to teeth. CAC is a huge trailing indicator because it shows only calcified plaque. Plaque exists and blocks arteries long before it is calcified. 5+ years. People regularly have massive arterial soft plaque buildup with minimal or 0 calcium scores. And soft plaque is almost always the part that ruptures and breaks away and you throw a clot resulting in a heart attack or stroke.

A CCTA will let you see soft plaque which could potentially help give you a better understanding of just how aggressive you need to be... But the problem there is that the target for everyone should still be keeping their LDL as lower than we have been targeting for years. And if they have other atherogenic particle load, like high Lp(a), then that numbers needs to be commensurately lower to account for the combined load.

I'm not telling you to go on statins. I'm not your doctor. I'm not a doctor at all. But I do have risk factors that require I pay careful attention to this sort of thing, and I spend a lot of time reading research here because I like being alive and want to stay alive in a generally healthy state for as long as I can. And if you are the same, then, well, I would suggest listening to your doctors. They're telling you to get your LDL to that level because they think it will improve your health outcomes, and the vast, huge, overwhelming majority of research over the past decades points towards lowering LDL as being hugely important for improving ASCVD outcomes in at-risk populations across a wide variety of study types, including MR genetic studies looking at health outcomes in people that effectively do not produce LDL in their liver (in fact these studies are what really inspired the class of medicine in the article to begin with) and they basically just don't die of ASCVD. You have other options besides statins, too. Ezetimibe. These new inhibitors - hopefully the small molecule version will be more accessible than the MAB version.

Significant inflammation reduction, which is another factor in ASCVD. More plaque sticks to you the more inflammation there is. It's a feedback loop, as well. There are some that will even claim inflammation is the real villain in ASCVD, not atherogenic particles. That's not the majority position and ignores a metric ton of research, but what both camps are in agreement on is that more inflammation makes the situation worse.

Another is that they help stabilize plaque - by calcifying it. Which sounds like a bad thing, until you realize some of the greatest risks here come from plaque breaking off, which soft plaque is way more likely to do. Calcified plaque restricts bloodflow, but doesn't throw bits of it off to cause even bigger issues.

It (Particularly ApoB/Combining LDL-C and Lp(a) is one of the single largest leading indicators of health risk we have.

If anything, the data we have is suggesting we've gotten wrong what the upper limits should be for what is considered OK.

https://www.lipidjournal.com/article/S1933-2874(25)00317-4/f...

> Low cholesterol production is an extremely serious condition.

This is correct, but not in the way you mean it. We know people can effectively produce no LDL cholesterol in their liver and have positive health impacts - these MR studies are a big part of what drove this entire class of cholesterol medications. And the monoclonal antibody versions of PCSK9 inhibitors have shown basically the same results.

Virtually all human cells can produce cholesterol locally de novo, including your brain.

The problem is if DDR4 was viable here it would also be absurdly expensive. There’s no world in which we survive this demand without a corresponding increase in supply. It’s not like there are zettabytes of spare cheap DDR4 sitting around.

I snagged my two 4tb acer variants for under 4k each. CDW still has them listed for close to what I paid.

I’ve got a 128gb m5 max mbp and two sparks. For my real-world use cases, a single spark running DS4 Flash will have fully responded by the time my Mac has even started generating tokens. I figured I’d have more generation heavy work when I also bought the Mac, but it has done very little work running LLMs since I got the first Spark.

I mostly run them clustered for DS4 and am quite happy with the performance, and the cost isn’t that much more for two than the MBP while giving me double the unified memory.

I’ll probably pick up a third to run multiple smaller models. I don’t understand why people would buy a halo over a spark at comparable prices, particularly because if you want to cluster, the cx7 be beats the shit out of them when it comes to latency and throughput

Plenty of demand outside the US. Why would the hyperscalers not buy the chinese RAM for all of their datacenters across the world besides the US one?

Rising supply from China will impact prices even in countries where there are tariffs.

Anything where you're dealing with a large volume of records/documents. Lots of people are using these for large-scale digitization of documents - scanned stuff being OCR'ed and summarized, generating embeddings, etc. Large scale translation.

Anywhere where you might have a large backlog of data to work with can end up in this sort of situation.

> The cuda cores can be broken up into compute complexes which larger blocks of memory directly attached to the cores.

Perhaps in theory, but for the gb10 stuff the memory is all on the CPU die and connected to the GPU die via nvlink-c2c

The dgx spark is the same chip and those are in the low 3s to 5 range for most of them depending on manu, storage config, etc. The dgx sparks also have connectx 7 cards in them to support the 200gbps networking for RoCE.

So I would expect the mini PCs to come in less than the sparks. Laptops I assume will be close in price with the addition of all the other laptop stuff.

Prefill is another advantage vs. Apple. It's way way way way faster on a spark than it is even on an m5 max.

Same model, same quant, same query, as close to as matched settings as I can get from vllm, and for workloads with large prompts + low cacheability, one of my sparks will often be done responding before the mbp is done with prefill.

Not true. This is aimed squarely at the Strix Halo and Mac markets. It's basically just strictly better than the Strix, and it's not clear cut vs that Macs in any sort of blanket statement.

My M5 Max 128gb MBP decodes faster than one of my Sparks, but the Spark's prefill is so much faster it can often answer the same query before the mac's prefill is finished. If you have large prompts, low cacheability, etc., a spark might be a very good options.

Not to mention you get can get two sparks and the MBP will be 85%+ of the cost at half the RAM.

I'm kind of tempted to pick one up. Leave running big models to my dual dgx setup, and all the misc. random stuff on an rtx.