tl;dr: physicists incl. hawking worry about singularities and event horizons, but to us, external observers, these need infinite time to actually form. basically, stop worrying about objects that can't actually exist in our light cone.
Have you heard about Roma? The communist states tried to help them but in a hamfisted ways like separating kids from parents. They did nothing to actually resolve racism. Many Roma ended up in squalor in segregated settlements. That goes on to this day and improves very slowly. It definitely was not "its moment".
So nice of you to teach me about the roma. I was sure to have never heard about them. /s
The history of gypsies and their segregation is much older though and the regimes inherited much of their attitude based on prior prejudices. The treatment differed in different times and locations. I've heard accounts of casual police brutality and of good integration in the local community and of a "leave everything as it is without engaging with hard problems". None of those was sanctioned on the bases of race theory and in fact the official stance was for equality. Compare it to the US where it was part of local and state legislation. On the other hand, the higher ups in the regimes were often repainted nationalists and common criminals of old so adherence to the ideals was often perfunctory and positive actions and outcomes were falling short of what was possible.
If it's part of legislation, you can fight it. If the official ideology is equality and racial prejudices "don't exist", then any problems are suppressed and you can't do anything.
Soviet union was defacto an apartheid when you consider how non-white ethnics were treated in practice. They just were so good at suppressing everything that it was never "an issue".
Yes the article is very meandering. But near the end he mentions that the chips nvidia sold last three quarters alone would require about 15GW of electricity to actually run. But where are all the datacenters? And how long can this go on?
When the ground truth is someone keeps buying zillions worth of equipment from investors' money, but the chances to use it are slim, not to even mention getting some profit off it, there just has to be some fraud involved. Probably not on nvidia's side, but would not bet on it.
I am going to assume those GPU sales are AI specific chips and not gaming cards.
A lot of these data centers do seem to be being built with many more planned, either way Nvidia has sold the cards. I don't necessarily think there's fraud involved but simply a lot of demand, speculative or otherwise.
Nvidia's financial statements are externally audited, their inventory is audited and their accounts receivable functions are also audited. I'd put a lot of faith in those audits.
That glorious day when I explained to my boss what wiki is and that we should have one internally, he fired "viki" into google, with smoothly honed muscle memory clicked first result..and got full screen of poon.
When I told a co-worker about https://pypi.org/project/voluptuous/ he immediately searched for the name alone, got really wide-eyed and closed the tab, then told us not to do the same.
There was a markdown library called upskirt, the authors were bullied into renaming it. They called it Misaka, because that's an anime character that uses shorts under her skirt.
Are you aware how https proxying works? Clients use CONNECT method and after that everything is opaque to the proxy. So without mitm you only know remote IP address.
There’s another difference which is what I was referring to: in both cases, your proxy has to forge the SSL certificate for the remote server but in the transparent case it also must intercept network traffic intended for the remote IP. That means that clients can’t tell whether an error or performance problem is caused by the interception layer or the remote server (sometimes Docker Hub really is down…) and it can take more work for the proxy administrator to locate logs.
If you explicitly configure a proxy, the CONNECT method can trigger the same SSL forgery but because it’s explicit the client’s view is more obvious and explainable. If my browser gets an error connecting to proxy.megacorp.com I don’t spend time confirming that the remote service is working. If the outbound request fails, I’ll get a 5xx error clearly indicating that rather than having to guess at what node dropped a connection or why. This also provides another way to implement client authentication which could be useful if you have user-based access control policies.
It’s not a revelation, but I think this is one of the areas where trying to do things the easy way ends up being harder once you factor in frictional support costs. Transparent proxying is trading a faster rollout for years of troubleshooting.
No mention of taint mode, you had to untaint all data coming from user. By comparing to fixed string or convert to number or filter through regexp at least. If this were more broadly adopted, would save everyone so many headaches.
reply