_diyar

Is this from the original trilogy?

> It would make no sense for an intelligent person to work on an economics problem which doesn't model reality.

So Newton was wasting everybody’s time with the gravity malarky after all?!

Yes, but note the central claim of your original comment:

> ... search space grows so big that any non-expert will become lost in it.

And I am saying that's a fallacious argument: chess has an enormous search space too, and that does not imply AI can't beat humans.

Also

> You would beat anyone if you could calculate a few thousands moves per second, even more so if you had a neural network that discards suboptimal moves early.

So like the AI can? Your argument's dont add up.

There are ~10^140 chess positions and Stockfish beats my ass in every single one.

He hit (killed?) his father on the head with a baseball bat.

However, consider this:

> Enterprises with Google Cloud spend commitments will be able to draw down their GCP commitments for these purchases.

Source? Quick search did not reveal any internal cost per tonne to orbit numbers.

Either way, if they did outsource these launches, they would not be paying the cost, but the price (meaning cost + margin). And that is much more expensive then just buying it from SpX.

The internal cost per tonne to low Earth orbit differs vastly between SpaceX’s Falcon 9 and Ariane’s best offer:

  Vehicle                       Cost / tonne
  Falcon 9 (booster recovery)   ~$2 million
  Ariane 64                     ~$5 million
  Starship (projected)          <$500,000

To meaningfully compete, European launch providers must try to match these costs, then spend a decade putting these vehicles into orbit. That’s no easy task.

Note that the comment you’re replying to does not claim Iran is winning.

No, the title is poorly phrased, I think you misunderstood.

All ratings agencies have their own scales, but broadly all ratings fall into one of two overarching categories, investment grade vs. junk.

The article explains that the rating ANT received was the highest within the junk range. So “highest junk rating” means within the junk category, it’s in the best sub-area. In other words, it’s just scratching below the investment grade rating.

This is important for institutional investors who can only buy investment grade, meaning if they can improve even one single grade up, they get access to a lot more debt.

Why would they when there are thousands of hours of radio and podcasts do train on?

First, there are plenty of auto-verifiable problems like ML benchmarks datasets, benchmarks on hardware / software performance for coding tasks, and lean certificates for math, e.g.

Second, I think RSI will not be used like N -> N+1 where N is the frontier, since doing those experiments at scale is too expensive. My guess is they are doing N -> m_{1,…,99} where m << N, and then taking the insights from that and trying it at successively larger scales.

All those kids who spent their youth breaking plywood kung-fu style might just save us.

Investment != loss.

IIRC investments are any transactions which increase the assets in the balance sheet. Losses are outflows net of inflows.

In abstract terms, one is about stock and the other about flow of spend.

If I remember correctly he converted on his death bed due to his read on Pascal’s wager.