omgJustTest

may 2026.

it is laziness! and what is surprising is it saves a lot of grief if you read it.

people will go to _amazing_ lengths not to read something new or unfamiliar. That feeling of "i must be dumb" is most often the reason people avoid it, and is just the normal part of learning something new.

Read papers given to you!

When someone dismisses your interpretation it serves to understand it well.

Additionally: A contractual mistake would likely not return specific performance (stock) unless special conditions were met.

For example: a company makes a stock mistake, you observe that at the time it happens, but then do nothing until you see the stock increase in value. Company could assert you _were_ due the stock but the value of that stock is determined by the time-of-breach and they return you $.

Unless you had a substantial claim to voting interest would probably be monetary reward!

NYL

Machines can read the info better than humans now!

Downvotes aside, there are real risks in the ability to meet demand.

Geopolitical and other risks exist here. The future isnt doom and gloom but it isnt exponentials and sunshine either.

Long-term is not what ppl are arguing for and that's not what the stock multiples imply.

Companies like Nvidia, up 1000% since 2023, clearly cannot rely on "oh you'd get returns in 5-15 years". They (Jensen and others) are arguing for AGI in a year (he said this at a talk at Stanford ~ 1yr ago).

Long-term, ie 5-15 years there will be many technologies that change the world. Some will come from transformative tech, others will come from other places.

Financial instruments, investors etc have timelines.

Blowing timelines can risk the future if not properly aligned, especially in correlated risk. See the internet bubble, where it was clearly important but took 15 years to recover after the 2000 boom/bust.

In general, longevity risk can include the financial instrument timelines, it can include other technical factors about the technology, and it can also be that the boom serves important people too soon with gains, real limits are imposed, and then the whole system resets until the real limits are overcome or resolved.

an agent hired by an agentic pipeline.

"we could find a nail for this hammer... or we could just hammer everything until we find the nail or make too much money hammering for a bit then sell in may and go away".

While Vivado/Vitis etc do amazing things, I challenge anyone to find a person who enjoys using them without TCL interfaces.

These tools do need attention, it's too bad there's not a better model than subscription bases like these.

Pretty sure, based on TCL base, that these tools were native Unix at some point, so the no-linux-free-beer vs windows-free-beer version are hilarious...

Ultimately one has, with so many vendor tools, a windows box somewhere so make it a remote compile machine.

Could one cover the antenna with strategic foil?

Removing seems hard/complicated but foil seems within most ppls reach.

But when will it run GPT? (:

reciprocal tariffs had put the non-tech and tech economy in stasis (except for hardware for AI). they are also are better than tax breaks and will supercharge bottom lines for large corporations once reclaimed and if prices remain high.

also if you want to test/force ai adoption you have to put pressure by firing some

now wars will put us into further stasis or decline via increased inflation pressure.

There's potentially some discussion of this publicly to investors. I feel there's more going on there and is re: quality issues described above.