• 2 Posts
  • 582 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 19th, 2023

help-circle

  • When people ask me about music I just say “I don’t really listen to much music”

    I know they’re trying to develop a conception or me, I recognize that they’re trying to get an idea of who I am, trying to start a conversation but I also know they will not draw any meaningful information from the answers I could give. Not because what i like is “too sophisticated and they just wouldn’t get it” but because my taste is completely incoherent. My taste is obscure and trash, and each listened facet is tonally dissonant from the last.



  • megopie@beehaw.orgtoMemes@sopuli.xyzOh no
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    20 days ago

    I block people who routinely post it.

    And it turns out a lot of algorithm driven platforms will stop showing it if you react overwhelmingly negatively and refuse to engage with it and I just stoped using platforms that didn’t respect the signals.


  • It’s a convenient storefront and discovery system (too an extent). Some games I play rely on its backend services. It’s never screwed me over or antagonized me. They also have really good Linux support without having to think to hard about it. They’ve done a huge amount of work on that front that would still even fit me even if I stoped using steam and I do legitimately appreciate that. I kind of get the feeling that the hardware was an excuse to do Linux support, like it seems to me that people there want Linux to be a viable gaming platform even if the business case is pretty niche.

    I don’t like that I don’t own the games, I don’t like the DRM, but there isn’t really an alternative on that front, except for GOG but they generally don’t have the games I’m interested in, which are normally smaller niche titles in categories that GOG isn’t focused on. The fact that they have a majority market share makes me nervous about them getting sold or going public and their practices changing. But them being the biggest kid on the block seems like a net positive given that the people liable to take their place are so hostile to consumers. Like the biggest critics of valve from within the industry (Tim Sweeney for instance) seem like they’re just angry that don’t get to be steam but more consumer hostile.

    I’m not going to defend everything they’ve done, I’m not going to say they’re without sin, but the biggest issues with them are universal to the entire industry.






  • No, it would not be possible, the etching process would destroy extant features on any silicon. There are multiple steps to it and some will destroy the work of the steps that come after, so putting a finished chip through would remove the existing features.

    Generally fabrication is done on a circular 300mm wafer, printing a grid of identical chips on it that are then cut out. It would be highly inefficient to do each chip one at a time, doing one small chip or 50 chips at once on one wafer takes the same amount of time and effort.

    And the bare silicon left after the first few steps isn’t really worth much. You can go buy a blank high end 300mm wafer for like 81 bucks online. The material value of the silicon is nothing compared to the value of the machine time.


  • Over all, box office sales are declining, so it’s easy to chalk up this to that trend over all and argue that people will watch the movie some other way, and Disney will still make their money back on streaming and parks.

    But those parks and streaming make their money based on over all cultural relavence.

    Arguably declining box office sales are largely driven by a declining relevance of the major producers who have consolidated so much of the industry. If 90% of the major films in a year are made by 2~3 companies who are all doing fairly similar things, and people aren’t interested in what they do, then it drives people away from theaters as a whole.

    So even if this poor box office performance isn’t an outright failure due to other revenue stream, it is part of a larger trend of the entire industry being destroyed by corporate consolidation and an uncompetitive environment.





  • X11 and Wayland are the bits that handle windows, mouse inputs and stuff around graphical user interfaces. They’re what makes GUIs work.

    X has been around since the 80s and is throughly decrepit and just does not support a lot of modern functionality. If you’ve had some issue with your windows and display being janky or monitors not working properly, it’s probably due to X11. It works for the most part, but there are just a lot of situations where it creates issues.

    Wayland fixes a lot off issues because it is built to handle modern situations better. If you want to see an easy example, if you’re on mint with X11, go to settings and set your UI scaling to some uneven value like 136%, you’ll probably see some weird buggy stuff happen. That’s the kind of thing Wayland fixes.




  • A lot of that cloud compute revenue growth comes from open AI and anthropic paying Microsoft to use their GPU compute to run their models, which is to say, that if you think “anthropic bankrupting people overnight with token costs” is unsustainable, then a lot of Microsoft’s cloud compute growth isn’t sustainable ether. Especially given that a significant amount of the associated “revenue” growth is just them counting redeemed credits as revenue. Credits that they traded to OpenAI in exchange for access to the IP and models that they built copilot on. So if openAI can’t run a sustainable business renting out Microsoft’s GPU compute to run openAI’s models, what makes Bill think Microsoft will be able to do so by running those same models them selves with that same GPU compute?

    If we ignore that shell game of “revenue growth” then the rest of their increase in profits comes from incredibly short term and short sighted strategies, such as huge layoffs across multiple divisions and jacking up prices for 365 subscriptions. In fact they’re probably over valued right now given that their current valuation is based on the assumption that they will continue to grow at the rates they have in the past. Price(of their shares) to earnings(earnings per share) across the whole market are at record highs. A price to earnings of 21 to 1 would be exceptionally high 30 years ago. The fact that the average P/E of the companies on the S&P500 is 31 to 1 doesn’t mean Microsoft is undervalued, it means that most companies are massively over valued. Like, you need to be expecting insane growth over the next 10 years to justify P/E’s like that.