What I don’t quite understand is how there is 1.5 billion in a single wallet. Or how are these things structured?

This article puts their total assets under management at $15.7b, which are held in different cryptocurrencies with ethereum at just above $5b.

So I am wondering how they have more than 1/6 of their Ethereum in a single wallet or were these multiple that were connected and got compromised through the same vulnerability? How expensive is it to have more individual wallets? Would it not be feasible to have it split in something like $100m chunks? Or any other more moderate size.

deleted by creator

So basically something similar to Pascal’s wager?

That’s pretty much me aswell, besides that I didn’t even spend energy to try and learn others. Simple docker compose, simple ui and easy way to add services.

I am sure there are alternatives that allow for more elaborate setups and fancier things. But for the low effort I put into it, I got a page with some nice buttons with appropriate icons that scales to whatever screen size it’s displayed on. Only additional thing I did was enabled to show some basic info to see if e.g. SABnzbd is downloading something, which was also super easy.

Why do you want a Mac? The only valid choices are aesthetics, brand loyalty or ignorance.

I feel like something got lost in the discussion here. I don’t want a Mac, that’s the whole point.

I want a device that is like the Macbook air, but without the crap Apple pulls. So with easily expandable storage, ideally expandable RAM and an easy way to run another OS than MacOS on it (i am aware that in theory Ashai Linux is an option for Aplle silicon macs).

Because i do think in this case there are more valid reasons than “aesthetics, brand loyalty or ignorance”, simply because the Macbook air to me in many ways seems like a very well rounded, nice package (with the caveat of Apple doing Apple things) and the rest of the market doesn’t offer an equivalent. With the Macbook Air M1 being 4 years old by now and options like Intels Lunar Lake existing, it really would be possible to make.

I didn’t specify “non technical” as I’d actually like one like it myself and would consider myself at least moderately tech-savvy. I meant average in what many people actually end up doing on their laptop, which is browsing, writing, watching videos and maybe doing some very minor productivity tasks.

That said i would say that yes, even non technical users would appreciate a high quality screen. They admittedly probably wouldn’t know to look out for it at purchase or what to look out for on a spec sheet, but in my opinion they would appreciate it during use (more so than some extra unneeded performance)

The demographic that is just Apple fanboys and they weren’t giving up their overpriced garbage no matter what.

Yes, apple fanboys will be fanboys, but the M-series Macbook Airs are imo are just a really great piece of hardware. Particularly the M1 when it came out and even nowadays imo is even priced decently for what it offers.

So far i don’t know a good non-Apple alternative that manages to fully match the M1 Macbook Air features (sans the non-upgradable storage that Apple charges way to much for and that destroys most of the value proposition).

As someone else already answered it is of course not ideal for movie consumption, since it gives you black bars top/bottom, but for productivity it is really nice. Everything from writing, spreadsheets or reading on the Internet benefits from it. Reading long horizontal sentences isn’t that comfortable and often times task bars at the top and/or bottom take away some extra space. So a typical 16:9 display ends up offering very little useful working space. The taller aspect ratio isn’t a massive shift, but a nice quality of life improvement.

It also means that you have slightly more space for the keyboard or a larger track pad.

If you are ever in a retail shop that carries Microsoft 's surface laptops you could check them out, as they are one of the few laptops that use a 3:2 aspect ratio display.

Haven’t looked at Chromebooks in a while, but you are right that the use case would be similar.

However I was under the impression that they are mostly competing at a lower price point. So I assume you wouldn’t find nice build quality or screens.

Beyond that I am not really familiar with how chromeOS stacks up nowadays or if it would be trivial to install Linux/windows on them. Especially if they still have EOL dates after which they aren’t updated with software anymore.

A quick search tells me that Google seems to work on a laptop and plans to merge (?) android and chromeOS more.

So overall again products that share some aspects of what the MacBook Air makes attractive, but doesn’t offer the full package.

Sadly doesn’t seem to be fanless, which imo is a really nice feature when you dont care about high performance. Not sure if in the real world you can find good deals on the snapdragon laptops, but list price is also quite high and that keyboard with touch function keys doesn’t seem great either.

So in my book that’s still no match for what a macbook air m1/2 offers, which by now are a few years old and can be found for decent prices. They might be aiming at the same market, but aren’t equal.

A proper non-Apple Macbook Air equivalent. Because imo for the average user that just browses the internet and does some light office work it seems perfect. And with that I mean:

• fanless
• good screen preferably 3:2 or 16:10
• long battery life
• unlike the air expandable storage and ideally non soldered ram
• solid build quality
• priced at maybe 600-800€?
• doesn’t have to have the greatest performance

Tbh i thought we would get it with Intels lunar lake processors, but so far no luck.

Yep. Weight is lost through diet, sport might help but can also make you hungry. The main benefit of exercise is better health through increased fitness.

People should compare how much calories exercising burnes per hour compared to the simple act of e.g. switching sugary drinks for water. Especially when you aren’t fit to begin with, meaning you won’t for example be able to run for hours each week.

Intermittent fasting definitely is a good method. But it varies for everyone. Imo it helps to start with changing what you groceries you buy. At least to me the further away from the plate you implement caloric reduction the easier it is.

If we are talking the manufacturing side, rather than design/software i am very curious to see how SIMC develops. You are absolutely right that there is a big advantage for the second mover, since they can avoid dead ends and already know on an abstract level what is working. And diminishing returns also help make gaps be slightly less relevant.

However i think we can’t just apply the same timeline to them and say “they have 7nm now” and it took others x years to progress from there to 5nm or 3nm, because these steps include the major shift from DUV to EUV, which was in the making for a very long time. And that’s a whole different beast compared to DUV, where they are also probably still relying on ASML machines for the smallest nodes (although i think producing those domestically is much more feasible). Eventually they’ll get there, but i think this isn’t trivial and will take more than 2 years for sure.

On the design side vs Nvidia the hyperscalers like Alibaba/Tencent/Baidu or maybe even a smaller newcomer might be able to create something competitive for their specific usecases (like the Google TPUs). But Nvidia isn’t standing still either, so i think getting close to parity will be extremely hard there aswell.

Of course, the price gap will shrink at the same rate as ROCm matures and customers feel its safe to use AMD hardware for training.

Well to what degree ROCm matures and closes the gap is probably the question. Like i said, i agree that their hardware seems quite capable in many ways, although my knowledge here is quite limited. But AMD so far hasn’t really shown that they can compete with Nvidia on the software side.

As far as Intel goes, being slow in my reply helps my point. Just today Intel canceled their next-generation GPU Falcon Shore, making it an internal development step only. As much as i am rooting for them, it will need a major shift in culture and talent for them to right the ship. Gaudi 3 wasn’t successful (i think they didn’t even meet their target of $500mio sales) and now they probably don’t have any release in 2025, assuming Jaguar Lake is 2026 since Falcon Shore was slated for end of this year. In my books that is the definition of being behind more than 1 year, considering they are not even close to parity right now.

Yeah. I don’t believe market value is a great indicator in this case. In general, I would say that capital markets are rational at a macro level, but not micro. This is all speculation/gambling.

I have to concede that point to some degree, since i guess i hold similar views with Tesla’s value vs the rest of the automotive Industry. But i still think that the basic hirarchy holds true with nvidia being significantly ahead of the pack.

My guess is that AMD and Intel are at most 1 year behind Nvidia when it comes to tech stack. “China”, maybe 2 years, probably less.

Imo you are too optimistic with those estimations, particularly with Intel and China, although i am not an expert in the field.

As i see it AMD seems to have a quite decent product with their instinct cards in the server market on the hardware side, but they wish they’d have something even close to CUDA and its mindshare. Which would take years to replicate. Intel wish they were only a year behind Nvidia. And i’d like to comment on China, but tbh i have little to no knowledge of their state in GPU development. If they are “2 years, probably less” behind as you say, then they should have something like the rtx 4090, which was released end of 2022. But do they have something that even rivals the 2000 or 3000 series cards?

However, if you can make chips with 80% performance at 10% price, its a win. People can continue to tell themselves that big tech always will buy the latest and greatest whatever the cost. It does not make it true.

But the issue is they all make their chips at the same manufacturer, TSMC, even Intel in the case of their GPUs. So they can’t really differentiate much on manufacturing costs and are also competing on the same limited supply. So no one can offer 80% of performance at 10% price, or even close to it. Additionally everything around the GPU (datacenters, rack space, power useage during operation etc.) also costs, so it is only part of the overall package cost and you also want to optimize for your limited space. As i understand it datacenter building and power delivery for them is actually another limiting factor right now for the hyperscalers.

Google, Meta and Amazon already make their own chips. That’s probably true for DeepSeek as well.

Google yes with their TPUs, but the others all use Nvidia or AMD chips to train. Amazon has their Graviton CPUs, which are quite competitive, but i don’t think they have anything on the GPU side. DeepSeek is way to small and new for custom chips, they evolved out of a hedge fund and just use nvidia GPUs as more or less everyone else.

Looking at the market cap of Nvidia vs their competitors the market belives it is, considering they just lost more than AMD/Intel and the likes are worth combined and still are valued at $2.9 billion.

And with technology i mean both the performance of their hardware and the software stack they’ve created, which is a big part of their dominance.

I have to disagree with that, because this solution isn’t free either.

Asking them to regulate their use requires them to build excess capacity purely for those peaks (so additional machinery), to have more inventory in stock, and depending on how manual labor intensive it is also means people have to work with a less reliable schedule. With some processes it might also simply not be able to regulate them up/down fast enough (or at all).

This problem is simply a function of whether it is cheaper to a) build excess capacity or b) build enough capacity to meet demand with steady production and add battery storage as needed.

Compared to most manufacturing lines battery tech is relatively simple tech, requries little to no human labor and still makes massive gains in price/performance. So my bet is that it’ll be the cheaper solution.

That said it is of course not a binary thing and there might be some instances where we can optimize energy demand and supply, but i think in the industry those will happen naturally through market forces. However this won’t be enough to smooth out the gap difference in the timing of supply/demand.

It’s a reaction to thinking China has better AI

I don’t think this is the primary reason behind Nvidia’s drop. Because as long as they got a massive technological lead it doesn’t matter as much to them who has the best model, as long as these companies use their GPUs to train them.

The real change is that the compute resources (which is Nvidia’s product) needed to create a great model suddenly fell of a cliff. Whereas until now the name of the game was that more is better and scale is everything.

China vs the West (or upstart vs big players) matters to those who are investing in creating those models. So for example Meta, who presumably spends a ton of money on high paying engineers and data centers, and somehow got upstaged by someone else with a fraction of their resources.

I meant success in the context of what a dating app should achieve: Matching suitable partners.

But you are of course right that for the company success is profit and the rest are just variables to be optimized towards that goal.

I would say yes, because as is the real niche communities dont have the size for larger discussions.

Mainstream communities e.g. about global news already have a decent size. And in many ways it doesn’t make much of a qualitative difference if there are 500 or 10.000 predictable comments. But many smaller communities are still mostly propped up by a few power users providing the majority of content which is not ideal for many reasons.

That and at least here in Germany we also use tons of land to grow energy plants such as rapeseed (apparently that alone uses 10% of all farming land), which imo is just incredibly inefficient. In case of an emergency at this scale i’d imagine that would be turned back to producing something like weat.

We could also simply produce a bit less meat, which is similarly inefficient in howmuch you need to feed the animals per kg of product.

Also regarding cost: I have yet to hear how a dating app solves the paradox that success means losing a customer. The incentives of the company and customer are not aligned and actually quite the opposite.

The company wants you to stay and spend as much as possible on the platform (optimizing to keep you just engaged enough to stick with it), whereas the ideal outcome for the customer means not needing the app in as little time as possible.