Do they need to spell it out for you? 'Defund the Police' mentality in politicians means they don't try to improve police staffing -> number of police stays stagnant, even while population is increasing, crime may be increasing w/ the population -> the work doesn't magically disappear, each cop works more hours -> higher pay per-cop, especially with overtime rates Sure, you can dislike the specific numbers here in the bay area (your OP didn't say anything specifically about that btw), but the general principle is very easy to understand

That's not what defund the police means. It means cutting most or all funding from police departments and redirecting it toward crime lowering initiatives like universal childcare. It's 100% not "higher pay per-cop" or even keeping the number of police stagnant. It's letting them go altogether.

Until the VC subsidies stop and the human devs are half the cost of the claude tokens lol

Moore's Law covers transistors, not LLMs.

Moore's Law hasn't covered transistors in quite some time.

We get about 10% YoY now, which is actually impressive, but not even close to the past experiences. Computing power used to take 18 months to double, and was being attacked at a bunch of different angles.

Now we are literally out of tricks, to the point where we had to undo some of those tricks because they were fundamentally flawed, and it takes 100x the engineering investment to get that 10% YoY, or sometimes only every other year, and that isn't going to continue for much longer.

We can't increase clock speed much. We can't increase density much. We are out of clever tricks. It takes an entire earth's worth of human talent just to produce the machine that produces the chips. How the hell are people still insisting that computing power continues to follow Moore's Law?

Several of the limits we've hit are fundamental matters of physics.

Meanwhile, LLMs ask for orders of magnitude more compute than is cheap and cheerful right now. Do we even have a single order of magnitude left for compute?

Jesus this is terribly written by AI, what is the point of putting out this slop?

I found the content quite interesting even if the writing style is a bit LLM. I just bought a GaN charger - I have a few, and am interested in the ongoing military strategic brilliance of the current admin.

Seconding the other comment, that second one is by far my favorite

Well yeah I liked it as well at the time but also it feels a bit out of place? Like what does a rollercoaster have to do with this product?

Remember https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_emissions_scandal? It's completely believable that benchmark-resembling requests are routes in a favorable manner.

Then what was the point of your comment

How do you know that only a consumer that wants what an advertiser is selling would receive an ad for that product?

Certainly we know the inverse, what of it?

Plexamp is still head and shoulders above anything comparable on the jellyfin side.

lmao what point are you even trying to make

But surely that's completely different, no? It seems that there are major differences between OSes and LLMs that preclude this comparison, in that an LLM is truly 'just' a tool. You can slot in another to replace it, IDEs and harnesses can handle basically any provider out the box, etc. An OS is not just a tool, its success depends on things like power management/general hardware interaction (requires collaboration with consumer computer manufacturers), what applications are available for it (dependent on third party devs), etc. It does seem that all the LLMs are substitute goods in a way that OSes are not at all.