And also when deleting a file that's on NFS, but it's reference count is non-zero in the kernel (because at least one process has it open) you end up renaming not deleting the file.
I'd guess that any of these media is sketchy for long-term archival storage.
I've got probably 30 5.25 floppies in my house, and I have a 5.25 drive and an old motherboard that can probably recognize that drive, and I've got the cables to connect the drive to the motherboad (and power supply). I'd guess that there's maybe a 20% chance that, if I spent a week trying to mash it all together I'd be able to get some data off of some of these floppies.
On other magnetic media the chances are between "haha, no" (oh, you've got an old 8 inch 10mb Bernoulli disk?) to 5% (oh, a QIC150 tape).
On the other hand, if I found a stack of moldy greenbar printout of some data, I'd say that most of the data can likely be recovered, and likely for not a tremendous amount of money.
Get a Greaseweazle and that floppy drive will work on any modern computer (macOS, Windows, Linux). I've been backing up floppies from a disorganized retro PC collection I bought, and almost all of them still work.
Zitron's claim is that much of that boost in profit for microsoft and alphabet and amazon is from only a few customers, specifically openAI and anthropic, and that those companies are buying and promising to buy lots of resources with money from investments from those same companies, and that largely this is unsustainable unless openai and anthropic can find a profitable business model.
And with both OpenAi and Anthropic are announcing record revenue growth to the point where Anthropic is now profitable this seems like it's going to work out fine for them.
He is right about that. Those companies are subsidizing the use of their models and at some point they are going to have to make a profit. It is unsustainable the direction they are currently headed in many people don’t like the messenger of bad news, but someone’s gonna be caught holding the bag stay clear of the blast crater.
I have watched many of his screeds; I think he undercuts his thesis with excess bile.
His core observation is that the unit economics of openAI and anthropic don't actually yield enough profit to pay off the huge debts that these two companies have incurred, and that as a result all the debt they've taken on will have to be written off which will trigger "the hyperscalers" to themselves suffer huge losses (likely wounding google and microsoft and destroying oracle).
He is rather more negative about the utility of LLMs than lots of other people (myself included); but his overall view of
1. they're not completely trustworthy
2. they're really expensive to train
3. it isn't obvious that anyone's willing to pay the full freight for the resulting product
4. lots of large orgs "that should know better" have gone far down the LLM "AI" road because they're looking for "the next big thing" when they should be pivoting to "mature, stable" companies instead of "hypergrowth" companies.
5. there's lots of debt and obligations and no obvious way for all of it to be paid off from revenues from openai / anthropic.
seems pretty reasonable. There seem to have been lots of bets placed on the hope that this stuff will continue scaling as it has in the past, if it is given more compute and data, and that bet is one that has yet to have demonstrated itself as correct.
Elsewhere, people have pointed out that many of the "FAANG" companies have shed lots of people and driven lots of profits, largely on the back of internal use of LLM tools. That doesn't necessarily contradict the skepticism that anthropic and openAI will succeed, and given all their obligations, if they fail it'll be a big mess.
But again, big Z doesn't do himself any favors when he rants about "failsons" or whatever.
Seems to me it's a reasonable position that runs face first into the irrational market.
Like they're digging a gigantic hole and Ed's up the top saying if you keep digging the hole will collapse (+ a whole lot of unnecessary swearing), and then a bunch of people jump into the hole to brace it and say "nuh uh, see we can keep digging" but really it's just postponing the inevitable and increasing the number of people who will be destroyed when it all crashes down
It's also possible that, because the US is busy bombing Iran, Iran may be busy attacking the US infrastructure in any way possible? The US is also in a tepid war with russia, last I checked.
Some "cyber" crew getting a shell on an outsourced service provider and running a "defrost" command is also a totally explanation for this situation. It's also totally possible that some crew has mapped out a list of PLC entry points for various orgs and has them in a spreadsheet of "if we find a vulnerability, we should X this Y with this prestaged script that our intern / LMM cooked up last year to defrost these freezers"
The US Constitution, specifically the 13th amendment, allows:
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall be duly convicted, shall exist within the United STates or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
So in fact, forced labor camps are totally legal and common in the United States. There are lots of private companies which operate these prison / factory systems and are quite profitable (unsurprisingly), such as NYSE:GEO.
All governments "redistribute wealth" friend, not just the left or right or up or down.
It all depends on which side of the bars you live on, amirite?
Do you think the left broadly supports prison labor or that carveout in the 13th Amendment? Personally I've never seen a leftist voice any feelings on them other than contempt.
You ain't disagreeing. Anyone who wants or engages in forced labor is fascist. Sounds like you found an example of that in the US. Yep. Many such cases.
That reminds me of core memory, which is also nonvolatile and for a long time was the primary memory of many computer systems.
I suspect "growing up" with a system where the computer itself is nonvolatile (turn it off, move it, turn it on, it's doing exactly what it was doing when it was turned off) changed the way people looked at computers vs modern systems.
It's too bad intel didn't push harder on their optane stuff. I guess it's too bad (for intel) for lots of different abandoned / failed projects.
Nonvolatile memory has advantages, but also disadvantages.
In a computer that would have only non-volatile memory it would be difficult to ensure that things that must be secret remain secret.
Various events like power failures or software bugs could prevent the erasure of the secrets when they are no longer required.
Total memory encryption, like first introduced in server CPUs by AMD, and then followed by Intel, could solve this problem, but even that depends on the CPU having internal memory that is volatile, so this allows only the reduction of the amount of volatile memory that is needed, not its complete elimination.
reply