451–460 of 536 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don't see any news about a stressed power grid in this area. That's because you don't live in Maryland. Our energy bills are through the roof and our transmission company is talking about rolling blackouts in 2027. https://www.thebanner.com/community/climate-environment/cont...
Well, they have done pretty well for 20 years of planning. Google tells me that AWS us-east-1 region (Northern Virginia) was started in 2006! EDIT The opening paragraph: > State regulators’ review of the controversial power line proposed to stretch across three rural Maryland counties will extend to at least February 2027, officials announced Thursday, a timeline that prevents developers from meeting the grid operato…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good point, it's a risk but so far the Chinese competition isn't up to par and it's unclear whether they'll be able to exploit the current window of opportunity.
You think this window is short? We've been dealing with this for years and years, and to me it seems more like incumbent manufacturers are too comfortable milking cash cows.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a world of difference between using a memory safe language and shipping a web browser with your app. I'm pretty sure Avalonia, JavaFX, and Wails would all be much leaner than electron.
The people who hate Electron hate JavaFX just as much if not more, and I'm not sure it would even use less memory. And while the build experience isn't awful, it's still a significant amount of work to package up in "executable" form especially for a platform different from what you're building on, or was until a couple of years ago. And I'm pretty sure Avalonia is even worse.
It likely would use less, and doesn't use a browser for rendering.
> And I'm pretty sure Avalonia is even worse
Definitely not
> The people who hate Electron hate JavaFX just as much if not more
In my opinion, I only see this from people that seem to form all of their opinions on tech forums and think Java=Bad. These are the people that think .NET is still windows only and post FUD because they don't know how to just ask for help.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand how this connects to your original claim, which was about trading ram usage for CPU cycles. Could you elaborate? From what I understand, increasing cache locality is orthogonal to how much RAM an app is using. It just lets the CPU get cache hits more often, so it only relates to throughout. That might technically offload work to the CPU, but that's work the CPU is actually good at. We want to offlo…
> increasing cache locality is orthogonal to how much RAM an app is using. It just lets the CPU get cache hits more often, so it only relates to throughout. Cache misses mean CPU stalls, which mean wasted CPU (i.e. the CPU accomplises less than it could have in some amount of time). > In the case of Electron apps, they use a lot of RAM and that's not to spare the CPU The question isn't why apps use a lot of RAM, but…
Yeah, I was saying CPU cache hits would result in better performance. The creator of Zig has argued that the easiest way to improve cache locality is by having smaller working sets of memory to begin with. No, it's not a given this will always work in every case. You can reduce working memory and not have better cache locality. But in a general sense, I understand why he argues for it.
> So programs need to aim for some reasonable balance of the RAM and CPU they're using
I agree with this, but
> but if you want to do it by a lot, development and maintenance costs rise and/or CPU costs rise, and both are more expensive than RAM, even at inflated prices
I would like you to clarify further, because saying CPU costs are more expensive than RAM costs is a bit misleading. A CPU might literally cost more than RAM, but a CPU is remarkably faster, and for work done, much cheaper and more efficient, especially with cache hits.
You had originally said
> It could be effective in some specific situations, but I would definitely not say that those situations are more common than the other ones
This is what I'm confused on. Why do you think most cases wouldn't benefit from this? Almost every app I've used is way on one end of the spectrum with regards to memory consumption vs CPU cycles. Don't you think there are actually a lot of cases where we could reduce memory usage AND increase cache locality, fitting more data into cache lines, avoiding GC pressure, avoiding paging and allocations, and the software would 100% be faster?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> leaving the memory makers in a tough spot Oh noes! Think of a poor memory makers! The amount of money flowing both from the AI bubble and from quite literally scalping both the server and consumer market... They gambled on the opportunity and if they fail - it's their problem.
Exactly, that's why they are not building more capacity and that's why RAM prices will stay up for years.
Capitalists did their gamble things. If they fail in that gamble what forbids them to sell the regular RAM they made for AI bubbleists to the regular consumers? Besides HBM it's just the regular chips which are exactly the same for the consumer/server market, why it would be any different?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you reconcile this capitalistic zeal with how opposed to honest capitalism these companies are?
I reconcile that with the fact that Europe doesn't make enough DRAM for me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The most well known thing about Musk besides being an asshat, is that his timelines are almost always imaginary. He is not building fabs on the Moon in "just a few years".
He doesn't have to build them to sell them. FSD has been sold for almost a decade, more than half the depreciation time of the cars. With first principles sales techniques it's possible X could sell these moon chips now and deliver them made on earth 6 or 7 Moore's law cycles later by a different company, like with the solar roof or hydraulic brick machine from alibaba, way cheaper.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
OpenAI does have projections for making money with ads that would make Google and Meta blush.
To show ads you need people to stay on your platform. This is especially true once ads become more intrusive or of lower quality, something the big players seem to gravitate towards to keep revenue up. Google and Meta have ways to lock in users (networking effects, the best search engine available, having your data stored there). I am not sure if OpenAI has that. Their edge regarding models is small, their strategy c…