disorderly

The project would help OpenAI move toward owning AI infrastructure, although ⁠its ability to fund large-scale commitments remains under scrutiny because the company is unprofitable despite a valuation of $852 billion.

Fantasy league valuation, you fucking muppet. Go public, open the ledger and we'll see what it's actually worth.

As someone with previous defense connections, I'd been wondering when we'd see this.

ITAR has severely restricted access to nav system tech export, but there was always this open question about reckoning position by visual cues rather than GPS + dead reckoning. We all knew it was technically feasible, but we assumed that having "visual" cues was further out because AI at the time wasn't up to the task.

The answer is the same, though. Nvidia, willing or not, is now a defendant in an unjust war, and must be subpoena'd by the ICC. At a minimum, they should be immediately sanctioned by foundry specialists (like ASML) until they are prepared to account for how, exactly, this tech ended up in a Russian missile.

I think you're making a strawman argument here. He isn't arguing that it's a binary switch that has failed to throw, he's arguing that we don't have compelling evidence that the ends justify the means:

In other words, corporate leadership is starting from the premise that AI has (or will) radically change the business, and they're working backwards from that premise to find the evidence to support this article of faith.

And this is completely true! Supposedly "data informed" organizations are trying to find a yardstick that shows actual, meaningful improvement in business outcomes from AI. In my own organization we have people touting LOC yet again because "big number", but anyone who's ever worked in software can tell you it's an asinine metric to use as a KPI.

It's inherently unscientific to start with the answer and work backwards to a satisfactory question. His point that this push is coming from the least knowledgeable of real processes- and more closely resembles religious fervor than business acumen- seems to at least warrant consideration.

Less paywall.

Another article discussing this without mincing words:

"Equity investors are one thing, but bond guys are the grown-ups in the room," Beauchamp told CNBC via email. "SpaceX might find it has its work cut out for it, but I suspect the market can absorb the issuance overall."

I'm taking that to mean that SpaceX might have a bit of a valuation change as investors decide what they'll pay to be a part of this grand adventure in creative accounting.

Yeah, you really have to read between the lines. Like, if this guy wants to kick me in the balls, and the alternative is 5/6 shots from that revolver in my head, then what's his plan for that sixth round? He's obviously gonna shoot me in the balls. That's what it means to be an informed consumer these days.

Google's behavior in this debacle has been utterly shameful. They got caught with their dick in the pie and have spent 8 fucking years arguing that it was for the good of society.

It's actually false. I know this because I passed physical chemistry.

I wonder if there's going to be a point in the future where we all look back at this massive over-investment and kick ourselves for making so much expensive electronics waste.