This is a very worthy article.
I have an impression that I've read it before 2024, but maybe that was a different article describing the same mess with how github exposes private repos.
Just in case, ibuprophen does not work well for pain relief [at lest for some kind of pain]. Paracetamol [acetaminophen] usually is much better against pain.
And paracetamol + ibuprophen can help with strong pain for which neither paracetamol or ibuprophen work at normal doses.
Not really. Both address different sources of pain, and do so using different processes.
Ibuprofen is a Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drug (NSAID) that reduces pain and inflammation, while acetaminophen does not. (Acetaminophen is believed to act mainly in the brain rather than at the site of injury).
Ibuprofen- Fundamentally, if the pain is caused by inflammation, reducing the immune systems response to it can reduce pain, but if the pain is more acute it won't make a dent.
With acetaminophen, taking more isn't a solution in most cases, you need another method to reduce the pain further if it doesn't achieve its goal.
(That's why it's combined with things like codeine, which affects the brain in a different way for an additive effect)
> you need another method to reduce the pain further
I don’t know about “most cases” but often you don’t want to reduce the pain _further_, you want to reduce the pain _again_. (Having an alternative definitely helps in the meantime.)
I don't believe that without evidence. Europe tacitly supports Israel even while some parts of it claim not to, and Spain is internationally irrelevant.
Exactly why they are singled out for chilling effect. They cannot retaliate substantially.
Evidence is not easy to find on these topics. It's espionage for christ's sake. You need to analyze material incentives and be familiar with the methods used. You cannot expect the media to hand you the answers, because that is not the purpose of the media especially on topics like this.
Israel responds to words with words. They respond to force with force. And they are busy enough dealing with the trouble that Iran keeps stirring up, they're not going to do anything to Spain. (Not to say that it would be out of the question for them to go after terrorists who were in Spain, but it would be very focused. Look at what happened after Munich--multiple European countries were incredibly inept about extraditing the attackers so Israel responded with assassination teams. Not strikes on anything they didn't believe had hurt them.)
(And there never was a genocide, but this isn't the thread for it.)
You're following the propaganda, not the reality. Just because Hamas calls them "press" doesn't make them so. And almost nobody will call Hamas on it because that would jeopardize future reporting. And unfortunately having something to report is far more important to "news" organizations than actually reporting the truth. We've even seen The Felon try to do that here--report only what I want if you want to be allowed into press conferences.
You seem to approve extrajudicial killing / assassination. Would be interesting if some countries decide to start assassinating Israeli terrorists in West Bank.
When ~white collar [researchers, programmers, managers, salespeople, translators, illustrators, ...] lose their income/jobs to AI's -> lose their ability to buy products/services and at the same time try to shift in mass to doing some kind of manual work, do you think that would not affect incomes of those who are the current blue collar class?
I mean yeas, values of consumed goods will decrease, so blue color workers will be able to consume more. That's exactly what is called increase of income.
My gut is telling me you're being intentionally obtuse but I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt. To reiterate in detail:
AI is poised to disrupt large swaths of the workforce. If large swaths of the workforce are disrupted this necessarily means a bunch of people will see their income negatively impacted (job got replaced by AI). Broke people by definition don't have money to spend on things, and will prioritize tier one of Maslow's Hierarchy out of necessity. Since shit like pergolas and oil changes are not directly on tier 1 they will be deprioritized. This in turn cuts business to blue collar service providers. Net result: everyone who isn't running an AI company or controlling some currently undefined minimum amount of capital is fucked.
If you're trying to suggest that any notional increases in productivity created by AI will in any way benefit working class individuals either individually or as a group you are off the edge of the map economically speaking. Historical precedents and observed executive tier depravity both suggest any increase in productivity will be used as an excuse to cut labor costs.
>This in turn cuts business to blue collar service providers.
No, it doesn't. Where's that is come from?
I mean, look at the situation from the perspective of blue collar service providers: what is exactly those goods and services, that they was be able to afford for themselves, but AI will make it unaffordable for them? Pretty obviously, that there's about none of those goods and services. So, in big picture, all that process that you described, doesn't lead to any disadvantage of blue collar workers.
I literally described the mechanism to you twice and you're still acting confused. I'm not sure if we have a language barrier here or what but go check out a Khan Academy course on economics or maybe try running a lemonade stand for an afternoon if you still don't get it.
Sure, maybe in 50 years. At the moment, it's a productivity tool. Strangely, by the look of the down votes, the HN community doesn't quite understand this.
Job market is formed by the presence of needs and the presence of the ability to satisfy them. AI - does not reduce the ability to satisfy needs, so only possible situation where you won't be able to compete - is either the socialists will seize power and ban competition, or all the needs will be met in some other ways. In any other situation - there will be job market and the people will compete in it
> there will be job market and the people will compete in it
maybe there will be. I'm sure there also is a market for Walkman somewhere, its just exceedingly small.
The proclaimed goal is to displace workers on a grand scale. This is basically the vision of any AI company and literally the only way you could even remotely justify their valuations given the heavy losses they incur right now.
> Job market is formed by the presence of needs and the presence of the ability to satisfy them
The needs of a job market are largely shaped by the overall economy. Many industrial nations are largely service based economies with a lot of white collar jobs in particular. These white collar jobs are generally easier to replace with AI than blue collar jobs because you don't have to deal with pesky things like the real, physical world. The problem is: if white collar workers are kicked out of their jobs en masse, it also negatively affects the "value" of the remaining people with employment (exhibit A: tech job marker right now).
> is either the socialists will seize power and ban competition,
I am really having a hard time understanding where this obsession with mythical socialism comes from. The reality we live in is largely capitalistic and a striving towards a monopoly - i.e. a lack of competition - is basically the entire purpose of a corporation, which is only kept in check by government regulations.
>The proclaimed goal is to displace workers on a grand scale.
It doesn't matter. What you need to understand - is that in the source of the job market is needs, ability to meet those needs and ability to exchanges those ability on one another. And nothing of those are hindered by AI.
>Many industrial nations are largely service based economies with a lot of white collar jobs in particular.
Again: in the end of the day it doesn't change anything. In the end of the day you need a cooked dinner, a built house and everything else. So someone must build a house and exchange it for a cooked dinners. That's what happening (white collar workers and international trade balance included) and that's what job market is. AI doesn't changes the nature of those relationship. Maybe it replace white collar workers, maybe even almost all of them - that's only mean that they will go to satisfy another unsatisfied needs of other people in exchange for satisfying their own, job marker won't go anywhere, if anything - amount of satisfied needs will go up, not down.
>if white collar workers are kicked out of their jobs en masse, it also negatively affects the "value" of the remaining people with employment
No, it doesn't. I mean it does if they would be simply kicked out, but that's not the case - they would be replaced by AI. So the society get all the benefits that they were creating plus additional labor force to satisfy earlier unsatisfied needs.
>exhibit A: tech job marker right now
I don't have the stats at hand, but aren't blue collar workers doing better now than ever before?
>I am really having a hard time understanding where this obsession with mythical socialism comes from
From the history of the 20th century? I mean not obsession, but we we are discussing scenarios of the disappearance (or significant decrease) of the job market, and the socialists are the most (if not only) realistic reason for that at the moment.
>The reality we live in is largely capitalistic and a striving towards a monopoly
Yeas, and this monopoly, the monopoly, are called "socialism".
>corporation, which is only kept in check by government regulations.
Generally corporation kept in check by economic freedom of other economic agents, and this government regulations that protects monopolies from free market. I mean why would government regulate in other direction? Small amount of big corporations are way easier for government to control and get personal benefits from them.
> In the end of the day you need a cooked dinner, a built house and everything else. So someone must build a house and exchange it for a cooked dinners.
You should read some history.This veiw is so naive and overconfident.
My views on this issue are shaped by history. Starting with crop production and plowing and ending with book printing, conveyor belts and microelectronics - creating tools that increase productivity has always led to increased availability of goods, and the only reason that has lead to decreased availability - is things that has hindered ability to create and exchange goods.
I'm curious, if there are any high level electrical engineers reading this please respond.
I wonder if that vertical (as far as the PCB goes) power connector will always ensure that this sort of imbalance will always occur. While we like to pretend that current is even in any given current plane that's not what happens. The impedance of the wires and copper is not perfectly ideal. This is why these connectors have equal number of grounds, so they have an ideal shortest path and balanced return current path. So I'm curious if electrically it's just impossible to have a vertical connector like that (on that shorts all the pins for 12V together instead of current balancing them) and have it balance current across the pins. The pins closest to the board should in theory have the greatest currents as they are the shortest path electrically. Based on the pictures that appears to be the case. It appears that the pins under the most stress are likely those with the lowest impedance.
Assuming my SWAG above is correct... I'm curious if this is affected by the per pin impedance on the PSU too. Where if certain folks are just unlucky get a situation where some pins in the connector have a significantly lower impedance than the rest.
If my second SWAG is plausible, my third and really bad SWAG is that removing the two ground pins nearest the PCB could actually "balance" the current better by forcing the current to use a slightly longer path for the power pins. But, my guess is this will just cause EMI issues. So please don't test this unless you're an EE and know what you're doing.
This is pure speculation on top of what Buildzoid, the posts above this have said, and what I've learned from Robert Feranec's videos. I'm in no way an electrical engineer, just a humble hobbyist and person that loves to learn.
Paralleling wires is stable because the TCR of copper is positive. When one connection carries too much current compared to its peers, it will heat up. This will increase its resistance, causing it to accordingly carry less of the current. So the system is self-balancing.
Do not remove ground wires. That is stupid. You'll just be raising the current in the remaining wires. EMI should not be a major concern as we are talking about DC power delivery here (also why I'm saying "resistance" instead of "impedance") and so the potential for trouble by changing the number of conductors making a connection is limited. Yes, anything could happen, but that's just the nature of EMC problems.
Yeah I realized that was the worst way to go about testing that anyway right after I went to bed last night. If (big stress on if) that was the issue a ferrite bead would be a better way to test it. Based on what you're saying my SWAGs were wildly off. I'd still like to see the sims of it however to see if they provide any illumination on the issue. What makes me think something weird is going on is that it's two out of six wires heating up to absurd degrees. Of the other four two are carrying normal currents and the last two (based on Roman's video) are carrying practically nothing. Buildzoid makes the convincing argument that clearly Nvidia engineers were aware of something like this could happen on the 3090. But, then didn't carry that over to the 4090/5090.
> This is why these connectors have equal number of grounds, so they have an ideal shortest path and balanced return current path.
These connectors have an equal number of grounds and 12v because the same current flows on both sides, and the required current justifies at least 6 wires at the specified current.
Pci-e 8-pin power is a bit weird, because it's 3 12v and essentially 5 grounds; but that's because it's pci-e 6 pin and a promise that the power supply makers know what they're doing... The extra 2 grounds signal that the PSU designers are aware of the higher current limit, even though the wiring specifications are the same.
If you use a WM with multiple named workspaces/tags - it is nice to have a key binding to run a terminal with a startup script (instead of the default shell) that creates or attaches to a tmux session with same name as the currently active workspace.
