treis

There are theoretically appeals but for the most part they're illusionary. The original decision is given a lot of deference and the appeal is almost always denied. Plus it's gated beyond a lot of time and money. In adversarial proceedings that's a weapon for one side or the other.

What do you think the government is like today? At least with LLMs you'd get your incorrect answer quickly and cheaply.

ChatGPT is the 5th most visited website in the world and gets a ridiculous amount of user data. They're going to be an advertising powerhouse.

I have a T430 that came out 14 years ago that does "serious" work for me. For almost everyone the computers they use are wildly over speced for what they use it for.

Eggs. That was the last omg inflation is crazy story and now they're about as cheap as they've ever been.

The annual operating cost of these is <10% purchase price annually. Even if the B200 is 10x more efficient in practice you can still operate the H100 at profit.

As it stands there's way more demand than supply. The new GPUs are going to run frontier models while the older ones serve smaller ones.

That said some of these are running in tents hooked up to mobile turbines. I can see some of those going away but generally I think you'll see them used until they start to fail in 5-10 years.

I think those are going to be run until they die. The capex vs opex is too high to obsolete them in a few years. They'll keep serving current gen LLMs for as long as they keep running.

That's not the issue. The issue is how tall these grills are and to a lesser extent curb weight. You don't need either to have third row seating or the ability to haul things.

>What makes the diagnosis "worth" $100?

The opinion of the customer paying for it

I think every business wants to bill on value not usage. That's where the real money is made. If a diagnosis is worth $100 and takes $1 worth of tokens you want to bill as close to $100 as you can. Right now they're billing $1 and barely making money.

I think the market exists but I don't think it's that big. I think the "play boomerang fu on my TV for cheap and little hassle" is a gigantic one.

I think dead on arrival is too extreme but the niche is certainly hard to see. The "just works" crowd will buy consoles and the "max performance" crowd won't be happy with this value. The niche is something like "willing to tolerate some headaches but not so much as to build my own PC". That exists but seems small.

Feels like they should have gone cheap. Undercut the switch and be the cheapest way to play games on your TV. We're pretty far past performance equalling more entertainment. A 150-200 box to play indie side scrollers is a niche that exists.

Eh this is true but in practice "my RAM stick went bad" is 0% of our downtime. It's almost always that we screwed up something in the app layer. And my company of ~100 does have 5 engineers on call 24/7. It's baked into our salary to do that.

There's a huge middle ground between Manhattan and homesteading on a $10k property. Here in Atlanta you can buy a 4/3 house for $270k or a 2/1 house for $160k. The rust belt and sunbelt are full of places with cheap housing.

I would but mine smells really bad because of the homeless :(

2 LLMs at the same time? I've always wanted to do that

There's no city in Georgia where a starter home is $1 million. This methodology has to be highly flawed.

We have more time than ever. Adults just choose to use it arguing on the Internet instead of building a free 3rd space for teens.

I don't know that signing up for a rewards club and then complaining that you're being marketed to is quite the platonic ideal of rebellion you make it out to be.

>Reagan is rolling over in his grave,” Senator Bill Cassidy, a Louisiana Republican who lost a primary last month after Mr. Trump targeted him for defeat, wrote on social media.

Reagan? Of the Iran Contra Reagan?

Most of the sunbelt isn't like that. You can buy a 4 bedroom house in Atlanta for 270k and a 2/1 for like 160 and salaries are fine.

What we spend on housing has doubled. That doesn't mean the cost has doubled. It means that we buy a lot more housing than we used to.

Real estate cost is local and there are parts of america where the prices have gone nuts. But there's a lot more where it hasn't and housing is affordable.

Translated:

Prompt: Hello! Introduce yourself in one sentence.

Response: Hello! I'm *ChatGPT*, an AI assistant developed by OpenAI, dedicated to answering questions, providing information, and helping solve various problems. How can I help you?

This is like Uber all over again.

OpenAI is selling $1 for $2 and spending ~$5 to make that happen. The question is if they get to selling $1 for $2 long enough to make they're investment back.

This whole thing seems nonsensical. If Mythos is this super hacker by far the best thing to do is just release the dang thing. Donate as needed to cover the Curls of the world but otherwise fixing bugs is (usually) trivial once they're found. Maybe we see a bump in zero days but long term the effect is much securer code.

Playing this game where everyone is blocked by a wall with massive holes in it is absurd. A farce level affair. The black hats will grind their way through prompts while the white hats are blocked from doing a "mythos hack my app" prompt and finding their vulnerabilities.

You can absolutely talk your way out of situations. Jeffery Dalhmer infamously convinced cops that his drugged victim was his boyfriend and they let him go. Probably not going to be able to do that after you're booked and in jail.

I don't think it's terrible advice to not talk to the cops but it tends to discount the reality of the world. Going through any sort of criminal trial is expensive and has devastating life impacts. Cops are the first step in that process and convincing them not to arrest you is the easy path out.

Pretty sure it just sucks. For years I've listened to Pablo Honey by Radiohead while going to bed. About a month ago it started to refuse to do that and instead start a radio from the first song on the album

Either prices are in their control and one company can gain market share by lowering them. Or they're not. I don't think you can have it both ways.

That goes against the "insurers are intentionally raising prices" argument.

They can grow profits by capturing a larger share of the market.