I would also add that one of the best experiences one can have is to have to maintain one’s own code - coming back 6 months or a year later (long enough to have forgotten the details of it) to the code one has made to add new features is quite the eye opener and a serious incentive for improving the quality of one’s coding because now you’re being burned from all the stupid lazy choices if your past self and also spotting things you did not know were important and whose full impact you were not aware of.

I’ve crossed paths with people who for one reason or another only ever did brand new programs from the ground up and their code tends to be messy, hard to understand and prone to break in unexpected ways and places when people try to add or change features in it.

I’m not making an argument against it, just clarifying were it sits as technology.

As I see it, it’s like electric cars - a technology that was overtaken by something else in the early days when that domain was starting even though it was the first to come out (the first cars were electric and the ICE engine was invented later) and which has now a chance to be successful again because many other things have changed in the meanwhile and we’re a lot closes to the limits of the tech that did got widely adopted back in the early days.

It actually makes a lot of sense to improve the speed of what programming can do by getting it to be capable of also work outside the step-by-step instruction execution straight-jacked which is the CPU/GPU clock.

FPGAs have been a thing for ages.

If I remember it correctly (I learned this stuff 3 decades ago) they were basically an improvement on logic circuits without clocks (think stuff like NAND and XOR gates - digital signals just go in and the result comes out on the other side with no delay beyond that caused by analog elements such as parasitical inductances and capacitances, so without waiting for a clock transition).

The thing is, back then clocking of digital circuits really took off (because it’s WAY simpler to have things done one stage at a time with a clock synchronizing when results are read from one stage and sent to the next stage, since different gates have different delays and so making sure results are only read after the slowest path is done is complicated) so all CPU and GPU architecture nowadays are based on having a clock, with clock transitions dictating things like when is each step of processing a CPU/GPU instruction started.

Circuits without clocks have the capability of being way faster than circuits with clocks if you can manage the problem of different digital elements having different delays in producing results I think what we’re seeing here is a revival of using circuits without clocks (or at least with blocks of logic done between clock transitions which are much longer and more complex than the processing of a single GPU instruction).

They definitely used to go down, just not since Bitcoin morphed into a speculative mania.

I remember Xilinx from way back in the 90s when I was taking my EE degree, so they were hardly a fledgling in 2019.

Not disputing your overall point, just that detail because it stood out for me since Xilinx is a name I remember well, mostly because it’s unusual.

That probably also means that when the trend reverses it will turn into a rout.

Yeah, but the Rogers is trully jolly .

The local TV here in Portugal also did the whole saying “that some consider a Nazi salute” thing in their news segment about this …

… and then showed Elon’s salute and a bunch of Nazis doing Nazi salutes as examples, leaving nobody in the audience but the blind in any doubt that Elon’s salute was the same as the salutes that the Nazis did.

That’s just self-indugent tribalist scapegoating using an argument which is circular and self-disproving.

• If there were too few people who cared about the Israeli Genocide enough for it to affect the vote, which is would justify the decision of the Democrat leadership to not do anything meaningful to agree with the demands of those voters (Biden pausing his own decision of sending 2000lb bombs is very much a “I’m saving you from myself” moment), then you can’t really blame those few people for the Democrat loss since there were not enought of them to make a difference and something else made the Democracts lose, so the fault is in the strategy followed by the Democrat leadership on other subjects.
• If on the other hand there were so many people who cared about the Israeli Genocide enough for it to result in the Democrats losing the vote, why did the Democrat candidates not go after that vote? Again, the blame is down to the choices of the Democrat leadership: it’s always easier to change what a handfull of people do than to change what millions do, so for the handful of people in the Democrat Party leadership to change their position with regards to supporting Israeli in its Genocide would be far more logical to expect in that scenario than for such a large slice of the electorate - millions of voters - to change their position instead. Even if one thinks “our leader’s position is more important than that of millions of people so it’s the millions who have to change their positions, not our leader” (a bootlicker’s mindset, BTW), it’s still incredibly stupid to go with “we’re going to convince millions to change their position rather than just that one guy” as a strategy so the blame still rests with those who chose to go with it.

All I see here and now is people making a pseudo-“argument” that is entirelly reliant on the axiom that “the boss is always right” to manage to somehow blame millions for something which the “the boss” could have (per the part of that very same pseudo-“argument” which claims it was the people who were against the Israeli Genocide that sawyed the vote) easilly avoided by just meaningufully changing his position on just that one subject. That presumption that the leaders are blameless and it’s the peons who are to blame for not being willing to follow the leaders no mater what they were doing, is a 100% subservient mindset.

If you’re going to assign blame for Trump, look at the handful of people in the Democrat Party who chose to do things in such a way that the results was that millions of their own electorate chose not to vote for them, thus delivering the election to Trump.

It’s called a “Final solution” and, yeah, multiple people in the Israeli Government talk about wanting a “Final solution for the Palestinian Problem”.

Personally I would’ve gone with a Protection Racket metaphor.

Yeah.

Those of us paying attention have spotted long ago that the Ju$tice System is mainly a tool for violent enforcement of the power of the moneyed and well-connected elites on the majority of the population behind a charade of “rules are rules” and it being just an independent and a fair mechanism for equal application of the “rules defined by Society” to all (all of which is nowadays and in a painlfully obvious way, clearly a bundle of lies).

All it takes is comparing how the Ju$tice System reacts to merelly the peons breaching uneven contracts with big companies or to the occupation of the property of the very wealthy by the poor, compared to how it reacts to violent crime in poor neighbourhoods, to see how their Ju$tice is not in any way form or shape Fair or Just.

Maybe it’s less so in some countries and more so in others, but nowhere is it actually fair and independent.

Just force them to use open standards and for it to be easy for people to move platform whilst keeping all the connections to their profile: the power of such social media entities is that people are locked-in because if they move they lose the connections of both followers and those they follow, which often means family and friends.

Basically a solution similar to that adopted in Europe for phone numbers - that you can take your number with you when you move providers - would reduced social media companies down to “just a pipe for social media connectivity” which would ultimatelly kill those with the worst practices given that the barrier to entry to be a “social media provider” is way lower than to be a fixed line telephony provider.

When in practice Corruption is not investigated or prosecuted, nobody ever gets convicted of Corruption, the Media can’t talk about Corruption as it would otherwise be defamation, hence the country has no Corruption.

I haven’t lived in the US but I lived in the UK and this was exactly how Britain had “no Corruption”.

Remember when the Snowden revelations came out?

Not only it showed that the UK was even more intrusive in their surveillance of their own citiziens than the US, but after those revelations, whilst the US walked back on some of the surveillance, the Government of the UK simply retroactivelly legalized all of it, the editor at The Guardian who published the Snowden revelations got kicked out and the entire British Press went quiet about it since then.

The chances of this being genuinelly about protecting children rather than about facilitating the identification of British internet users by the GCHQ, are pretty much zero.

Personally I lived in the UK back when the Snowden revelations came out, so switched to being behind an always on VPN and since then never lost that habit. (And yeah, it’s of course not a foolproof mechanism, but it sure makes it way harder to be caught in the broad trawling done by the surveillance apparatus, plus it’s also pretty useful for “sailing the high seas”)

I’m sure buying them is generally easier, this being the United States Of America.