cduzz

I've mulled this over and have come up with a plan that's probably "not even wrong" that's something along the lines of:

1. there needs to be a buffer zone between Russia and Ukraine; it needs to come from both countries. There are plenty of oblasts in Ukraine that are annihilated hellscapes where demographically it's possible that Ukraine may be happy(ish) to shed those populations since they're broadly prorussia(ish). Similarly there are regions of Russia that should be set aside as "buffer zone". Ukraine would be free to chose which regions are set aside for this buffer zone; the remaining depth of the zone will be "contributed" by Russia.

2. This buffer needs to be rebuilt by the west since they're the ones who "caused all the damage" -- a neutral 3rd party should oversee that rebuilding; obviously western countries won't want to just pour money into Oligarch owned companies -- instead the buffer region should be managed by some set of neutral countries such as Ireland, Indonesia, and India. This strip of land would describe the whole Russian / Ukrainian border and be at its narrowest 20 miles wide.

3. This region will eventually (in 40-60 years) have a plebiscite to allow it to rejoin russia or join Belarus, or remain independent.

4. So long as this land and Belarus remains free of Russian or Ukranian armies or military personnel Ukraine may not join nato. Ukraine will be free to petition to join nato, but so long as Belarus and the border zone are free of Russian or Ukranian forces nato will not allow Ukraine to join nato (IE no formal article 5 protections of Ukraine from nato)

5. Belarus will have sanctions lifted if they have normal elections.

6. This new zone will be under "russkiy mir" in that this zone will be governed by the written legal system as modeled by the russian legal system; though instead of the ultimate power (the "roof") being russian, it will instead be indigenous.

7. taxes would be collected and disbursed to Russia and Ukraine and Belarus in some proportion of the land "contributed" by each party to this buffer zone.

So -- in this way, the Russians can be told "they won" even though in practice this gives Russia no control over Ukraine proper. They can be told "NATO has been made to pay!" and "All of this is under Russian Law" but at the same time it helps squeeze Russian control out of Minsk as well. The goal is to allow Russians to be Russia without being under the thumb of Moscow.

Anyhow, sorry for the fan fiction...

Ukraine can stop the war at any time by committing mass suicide. They're just being selfish.

I think it's a matter of scale and focus.

Dell is at a sweet spot for many organizations where you can get hardware support from dell, or not.

You can (with dell) just buy used junk and use that, and you can still access their support library for firmware updates.

I did a lot of work with storage with dell stuff and I found it far simpler to "outsource" the storage integration to dell than to do it myself -- they make sure that all "2tb disks" are the same (exact!) size, they all use the same mechanism for firmware updates, etc.

A much larger org could have saved some money doing that integration and testing internally; a much smaller organization could save money just buying stuff from wherever and not worrying.

I personally haven't used dell support in over a decade, but I have found that their "look up the serial number" web site has been invaluable; I've found the fact that they publish firmware for all their stuff and let anyone install it valuable; the huge secondary market for dell is helpful, etc. And, if you care, you can even give them more money to directly support you, instead of just doing it yourself.

HPE, on the other hand, locks their stuff down super hard; I assume there are reasons to go with HPE, but I'd rather get clocked on my superdome with an HPUXy stick than ever touch that stuff again.

I was fortunate enough to work with a fair bit of sun gear (3/260, 4/670, enterprise 250/450 and even some big iron 6500s) back in the day.

These days, I've got several Dell 5820 style workstations and I'm pretty sure someone who interned at sun in the 1990s is now running dell's workstation division. The medium sized dell deskside towers have nearly identical vibes as those old workstations, and are a pleasure to work with.

I did systems administration for a university math department for several years. I came to the conclusion that mathematics (and perhaps philosophy) were both topics where it was likely that no staff members in that department could describe "what goes on here" and that possibly even within the department, one professor may not be able to describe what another professor's actually doing.

The closest I could come to describing math is "some abstract process where imagined structures are characterized and extended; the most critical part of the process is identifying where seemingly independent structures are found to actually be fungible in some previously undiscovered way".

A simple example is

  "hey, did you know that x^i is the unit circle?" 

  "what's i?" 

  "i is defined as if you square it the result is -1" 

  "what does that have to do with circles?"

That sounds like "MII" -- the 100mb version of AUI?

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.

Would they announce record losses and financial distress?

We'll see when they go public. Until then all these press releases are strategic messaging...

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.

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.

Sure, that's possible?

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"