What good is high market share in a market that’s well on its way to being killed off for good?

Retail users have - unfortunately - neither the disposable income nor the political will to compete with the billionaires driving this development.

A lot of people want local inference, and somehow they assume that the problem is solved now because we have open-source models, we’re going to be able to run them on our computers, and so we’re not going to need all the stuff in the data center.

We don’t need them even without local inference. There was already more than enough total global compute for the most valuable use cases of LLMs (research, development, admin). The datacenter build-up is almost entirely fueled by utterly unrealistic expectations of future capabilities. Before and now the case for local inference is a matter of access, not capacity.

But from a global allocation perspective, actually it’s quite terrible to have everybody, like, have a bunch of the world’s limited supply of DRAM sitting in their own computer and being used five percent of the time.

Utilitarianism like this is a disease. By the same logic, it’s inefficient that we allow other species of animals to exist and consume usable energy. Hell, why stop at other species? It’s inefficient to allow humans to exist - let’s kill all humans!

Now, I know that’s not what he said, the point was to show that when someone uses utilitarianism as a serious argument, they are no longer worth listening to.

Like you want maximum utilisation in the cloud if you’re trying to deal with this very supply-constrained environment,

The supply is only constrained because you keep hoarding more than you need. Maybe it’s time for some communization? So communities where data centers are built get most if not all of the profits from it?

He never was a manager for BlackRock - nobody sane would give him operative control over anything they value. He had a “we pay you for political access, don’t touch anything” cushy position as the chairmen of their supervisory board.

That part i understood but again why the pushback?

The German pushback stems imho from Merz belonging to the CDU, whose political core can be summed up as

• Almost completely blind worship of the USA and
• Class warfare against the working class.

In their mind they just need to wait out the Orange Man and then most things can just go back to how they were before. They don’t want to make Him angry in the meantime, which the “associate member” label would certainly lead to.

EDIT: Ursula von der Leyen is imho actually pretty far removed from her party’s stance on this.

We don’t.

Here in Germany one of the few good things that came out of our previous federal government was the SBGG, which - among other things - allows you to delete the entry. And before anyone points it out: I’m aware it isn’t perfect.

What’s there to lay out, other than what anyone can read from the Wikipedia entries?

The Internet is a specific global network of computer nodes that use some version of the Internet Protocol to communicate with each other. There are many different services over on it. The WWW is simply one such service.

Finally someone who at least knows the difference between the WWW and the Internet…

If you want to do the least amount of tech support: Fedora Kinoite.

Calling “Die Linke” far-left is imho, frankly, insane. Upwards of 80% of their positions are virtually the same ones the SPD had back in the few decades of them being actually moderately left under Willy Brandt. If you want far-left, that’s the MLPD.

Just because every other major party keeps moving further and further to the right doesn’t magically make the only moderate-left wing party far-left.

And for clarification: Left vs right is the political axis of the economic class struggle. It’s neither liberal vs illiberal nor progressive vs conservative.