{"id":15154,"date":"2025-01-12T01:05:00","date_gmt":"2025-01-12T07:05:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.zmetro.com\/?p=15154"},"modified":"2025-01-12T08:08:57","modified_gmt":"2025-01-12T14:08:57","slug":"1-12","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.zmetro.com\/?p=15154","title":{"rendered":"1.12"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The programming language C is 75.88 times more energy efficient<\/a> than Python and 71.9 times faster<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Once I found my sweet spot, though, I started racking up sales<\/a>. (To this day I can\u2019t talk on the phone without lapsing into my \u201ctelemarketer voice,\u201d which sounds like Phil Hartman<\/a> on ecstasy.) I wasn\u2019t a coaxer, a hand-holder, a persuader; I hit people with my spiel, and if they hesitated or said no, I hung up on them midsentence. On to the next one. Unlike many of my less successful colleagues, I quickly learned to take yes for an answer; though we were legally required to read a long list of mandatory disclosures to all our sales, I noticed that this often broke the spell and gave people an opening to back out or \u201cwait and ask the wife about it.\u201d As soon as I heard a yes, I said, \u201cGreat choice!\u201d and transferred them to confirmation. My manager occasionally came by and reminded me that it was technically illegal to skip my disclosures, but he made commission off my commission, and his tone made it clear that I could do as I pleased as long as I kept putting up numbers. Which I did, to an almost ludicrous degree. I hit every kicker, every bonus. I won scented candles, gift cards, and countertop appliances in daily sales contests. I earned the executive parking space in the very front of the lot, even though I took the bus to work. I was pretty pleased with myself. Making $800 in 15 to 20 hours a week when your monthly rent is $300 and beers are a dollar is real wealth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I haven’t seen Landman yet but this is an all-time speech by Jerry Jones. Probably because he\u2019s not acting. That\u2019s his real life<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n


<\/p>\n

\u201cIt\u2019s amazing to me how much waste is consuming our daily work<\/a>. It seems like 30% of everybody\u2019s job is fixing something\u2014either the bad quality or late product or something that shouldn\u2019t have happened,\u201d said Ortberg.<\/p>\n\n\n

The 2024 \u201cwinners<\/a>\u201d of the annual Shkreli awards<\/a>, given each year to perpetrators of the most egregious examples of profiteering and dysfunction within the healthcare industry, have been released from the Lown Institute, an independent healthcare thinktank. The recipients are chosen by a panel made up of health policy experts, clinicians, journalists and advocates. The awards are named after Martin Shkreli<\/a>, the infamous \u201cpharma bro\u201d who rose to international notoriety after increasing the price of lifesaving anti-parasitic drug Daraprim 50-fold.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There\u2019s one mistake I see more often than anything else, and it\u2019s absolutely deadly: ignoring the rest of the codebase and just implementing your feature in the most sensible way. In other words, limiting your touch points with the existing codebase in order to keep your nice clean code uncontaminated by legacy junk. For engineers that have mainly worked on small codebases, this is very hard to resist. But you must resist it! In fact, you must sink as deeply into the legacy codebase as possible, in order to maintain consistency. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I agree that foreign billionaires should not meddle in British politics, but I strongly believe in their right to free transparent speech & that they can say whatever they want to their audience on X. Those two are separate issues. When Bill Gates has direct access to Keir Starmer & we are not allowed to know what they discussed<\/a> it is much worse than open public posting on X. At least there is transparency on X.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In this century\u2019s first decade, investors had the opportunity to participate in \u2013 and lose money due to \u2013 two spectacular bubbles<\/a>. The first was the tech-media-telecom (\u201cTMT\u201d) bubble of the late \u201990s, which began to burst in mid-2000, and the second was the housing bubble of the mid-aughts, which gave rise to (a) extending mortgages to sub-prime borrowers who couldn\u2019t or wouldn\u2019t document income or assets, (b) the structuring of those loans into levered, tranched mortgage-backed securities, and consequently (c) massive losses for investors in those securities, especially the financial institutions that had created them and retained some. As a result of those experiences, many people these days are on heightened alert for bubbles, and I\u2019m often asked whether there\u2019s a bubble surrounding the Standard & Poor\u2019s 500 and the handful of stocks that have been leading it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Starmer\u2019s denunciation<\/a> of Musk for \u2018spreading lies and misinformation\u2019 about Muslim child-rape gangs is an orchestra of discordant duplicity<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In contrast, GPU cores are like a hundred line cooks who excel at repetitive tasks<\/a> – they can chop an onion in two seconds, but they can’t effectively run the whole kitchen. If you asked a GPU to handle the constantly changing demands of a dinner service, it would struggle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The proposed conversion to a PBC would also mean the non-profit entity will relinquish governance over OpenAI\u2019s business and operations. One person familiar with the situation said those powers could themselves be worth<\/a> billions of dollars. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

So we talk about a market of 0.0001% of the car industry, with cells with a different build-up and, therefore, with a different production. There is no way these cells\u2019 prices<\/a> can be compared with the car industry\u2019s prices.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Despite losing<\/a> hundreds of millions of dollars and control of her own company, Martha doesn\u2019t give up and in 2015, now in her mid 70s, she creates a new image and a new career starting with, of all things, a shockingly hard-assed roast of Justin Bieber<\/a>. The Bieber roast leads to a succesful colloboration with Snoop Dogg. Legendary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Trump is now at the zenith<\/a> of his power. The moment he\u2019s sworn in on January 20, he\u2019s just the plain, old president of the United States.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is something uneasy in the Los Angeles air this afternoon<\/a>, some unnatural stillness, some tension. What it means is that tonight a Santa Ana will begin to blow, a hot wind from the northeast whining down through the Cajon and San Gorgonio Passes, blowing up sand storms out along Route 66, drying the hills and the nerves to flash point. For a few days now we will see smoke back in the canyons, and hear sirens in the night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Just a reminder that Juan Merchan’s daughter, Loren, is the co-owner of a very lucrative Democratic consulting firm<\/a>. Here is a list of her clients. Receipts coming:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

FEC reports show Loren Merchan’s Democratic consulting firm raked in at least $7.3 million between the end of May 2024 (after Pres Trump was convicted) and Election Day. Top clients<\/a> during that time include Tammy Baldwin, Gretchen Whitmer, John Tester, Cory Booker.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Still, the Apps strategy<\/a> was confused between DOS, Windows, OS\/2, and Macintosh. The team was not particularly organized for success as a combination of product units and job functions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Before we talk about SpaceX, let\u2019s talk about every single other private rocketry<\/a> company ever. It\u2019s easy to do, because they all failed (or are in the process of failing, or are likely to fail in the future). There\u2019s an old joke in the rockets business: \u201cHow do you become a billionaire in the space industry?\u201d \u201cEasy, you start with two<\/em> billion dollars\u2026\u201d Okay, I\u2019m not actually going to talk about all of them, but here are some of my favorites. When I was young I was really into Masten Space Systems<\/a> which pioneered vertical takeoff\/vertical landing rockets, and won the NASA\/Northrop Grumman lunar lander challenge. Now bankrupt. And then there was Armadillo Aerospace<\/a>, founded by none other than John Carmack, a man who built a career in pushing hardware to its absolute limits<\/a>. Seriously, read that link about the fast inverse square root algorithm (or watch a video explainer here<\/a>).2<\/a> Carmack is built different. Didn\u2019t matter. Bankrupt.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

“It\u2019s unclear when the reservoir<\/a> first went offline”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Prior to that ruling, nominees<\/a> typically would step down at the end of their term, the governor would nominate a replacement, that person would start serving and the Senate would vote to confirm or reject the nomination.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cI had lived through the destruction<\/a> of Douglas Aircraft and I saw the same thing about to happen at Boeing,\u201d Hart-Smith explained in a 2019 interview.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This advance is the culmination of two decades of work that has gone largely unnoticed to the outside world, according to researchers involved in the project. The electronic warfare equipment<\/a> used by the People\u2019s Liberation Army (PLA<\/a>) is evolving rapidly. For example, the multi-band antenna used in the new phased array radar has \u201ccomplex structures such as curved surfaces, multilayer dielectrics, metal conductors and thin dielectric layers\u201d, wrote the project team led by Professor Li Bin from the University of Electronic Science and Technology of China in a paper published in November.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Alternatively, if you assume the $600 billion will be borne by just the world\u2019s 100 million wealthiest and most intensive<\/a> users of digital services, they or their employers would need to come up with a much larger $6,000 per year. Again, it\u2019s not an impossible figure, but not one that can be found in next year\u2019s budget. Meanwhile, planned capital expenditures by tech titans has continued to increase, so the required annual revenue per user keeps increasing. So, while it\u2019s clear that AI is set to be truly transformative, it could still take a decade to justify current levels of investment. What that means is that there are two possible futures: One in which capital markets are happy to allow the hyperscalers to keep throwing money at AI in the expectation of future market leadership (and blowing out their balance sheets in the process), and one in which they are not.<\/p>\n\n\n\n