- Of course not. It just seems that they might actually be the most transparent segment of this entire system which makes more visible.
And well… from the society’s perspective high/very-high prices for new drugs for a decade or so (20 years seems too long though) might be a good deal if it results in very high investment into R&D.
- Would you not expect companies which actually want to make to cores to have an advantage?
And the companies that don’t want to make it their core business but can afford enough resources (e.g. Google, Apple, Amazon) would just use them to leverage their core products.
I could only see this on the lower end where margins/required R&D investment are relatively low.
- > I don't but the ongoing war is for more land
I don’t think more land per se is the objective.
> As planned it's worked and USA has no answer to that problem
What problem is that? I don’t think US pays that much attention to NK.
From that perspective US has been much more successful than China. The existence of Taiwan as an independent state is a much, much bigger issue for for them than NK is for US.
> I'm just trying to say that strongest country wins no matter what.
Wins what? We’re not living in a grand strategy video game.
- > Lockdowns, when done properly, do work.
It works when (or rather almost entirely because) you’re in a geographically isolated island.
Maybe the Netherlands could have pulled this of if they really wanted to, like them time they flooded half of the country to keep out the French but it’s not applicable to any other country in Europe
- a ‘masterpiece’ is a very subjective term. Most are viewed as such not because of some objectively measurable quality but because of their uniqueness/originality (at the time) and context. In that regard it’s hard to imagine AI could achieve that until it became very good at imitating humans.
- > pharmaceutical companies
But it’s hospitals/labs which are as bad or much worse in this regard. “Greedy” pharmaceutical companies are just a boogeyman, insurance companies, hospital admin and doctors are just fine with charging “random”/arbitrary fees based on clients perceived ability to pay and not in anyway related to actual costs.
- That’s more of a stereotype which is really only accurate in some cities and even there usually only in the center areas/old town.
50-70%+ of all Europeans who live in urban areas commute by car*
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php...
- > Couldn't be the voters in the south, must be The Media.
You do realize that in even even in the reddest southern state (Alabama) 35% of people did not vote for Trump?
Also that if your diatribe was targeted at any other ethnic group or nationality it would almost invariably be perceived as racist by most?
- They might be putting themselves in a similar position as Intel though (maybe worse since I don’t recall Intel ever being as greedy..) if their competitors eventually catch up.
Unlike in gaming in the data center initial cost + performance per watt are the only thing that really matter (besides software, Nvidia has a huge moat there..). And in relation to how much Nvidia is charging per GPU total power costs are close to zero.. So 4 ‘worse’ but much cheaper chips might be a better deal than buying an A/H100 etc.
- By being so much ahead of everyone else that they thought that didn’t have to do anything anymore.
On desktop, anyway. Mobile is a different store, back in the mid 2000s they had everything to dominate the market for the next 10+ years (e.g. the fastest ARM chips) yet choose not to due to reasons..
- Nvidia and Intel are in very different markets and their product ranges barely overlap.
And well Nvidia is almost a monopoly at this point so they have barely any incentives to continue innovating as opposed trying to extract as much money as possible from their clients.
On the other hand look at what happened with CPUs over the last few years. Huge improvements in efficiency (including Intel)
> hasn't really improved in the last 15 years.
I don’t think that’s even close to being the case in almost all use cases. Increasing complexity/bloat has obfuscated that to a large degree though.
- > Korean film/TV/music within 2 decades.
True. But it’s still rather limited and almost nobody is learning Korean just because of that.
e.g. in the 60s French cinema was pretty popular for some time in the US in a similar way. Barely anybody learnt French because of that (and it would’ve been way, way easier than Chinese or Korean)
- Isn’t it available on https://store.steampowered.com/steamos ?
_v3.png){kind=link}
> I am talking about a group of people who share vile political goals
right?
So are you implying that they only gain the accent when they join this group or that having the accent makes them predisposed somehow to join it, or what?
What makes your diatribe (part II) even more mind-boggling is that this whole discussion is about people who chose to move to some other states. Which probably would make them less likely to support these “shitty ideologies”? That is unless you believe they are somehow predisposed to hold ’vile’ views because of where they were born?
> Guess it's a good thing I'm saying bad things about people with shitty ideologies.
Well you’re implying that any person who speaks with a southern accent is incapable of holding liberal/progressive(?) beliefs? Or that anybody born in “the south” is regardless pf the accent? That everyone who doesn’t/isn’t is a somehow inherently superior human being? It’s hard to say.. either idea is pretty disturbing.
> you wanted to get mad at?
I’m not mad.. just a bit puzzled and surprised that you’re not sharing your thoughts on Reddit instead.