All rocketry was, back then. You wanted ballistic telemetry? If you didn't know someone who worked on the V-2, you had to launch your own sounding rockets.
I think the parent's point stands. There's a lot more pragmatic concern with the damage SpaceX could do in 2026, versus the damage Nazis could do in the 1960s.
It’s already obvious that it will be a scam. Higher benchmark scores and lower cost are two signs that customers are about to get scammed. We saw it with GPT-5.
This actually proves my point because if you read the anecdotes, you will notice a marked decline in performance. The version number goes up but the actual performance declines. The benchmarks can tell any story you want them to.
Is it? It might be possible that it's a scam, but for something to be "obvious" it has to release first.
There are plenty of ways to reduce inference cost for a high-intelligence model. Making sparser weights, for example, can increase the parameter count while reducing the inference cost and time.
I think you are informed by more of an emotional interest than a technical one, here. You've written several such posts and many of them are astronomically unlikely predictions.
Ok but didn’t Karpathy make it clear that we live in the vibe era? I’m inclined to trust vibes more than technical jargon, and boy are the vibes off with what’s been happening!
The mechanism of individual technologies, both actual and possible ones, does not interest me much. [...] At times, frequently even, a technology is born from an accident—like when one was looking for the philosopher’s stone but invented porcelain instead—but the role of intention, or conscious purpose, in all the causative efforts oriented toward technology increases with the growth of knowledge itself. In becoming more infrequent, surprises can actually reach almost apocalyptic dimensions.
Not really. The Apple I was discontinued within a year of release, if you saved that money until 1978 then you could get an Apple II that would be supported for almost 20 years give-or-take.
Part of the reason the Apple I is so rare, is that Apple offered an Apple I trade in program. Apple would destroy the boards of Apple Is that were traded in for Apple IIs.
I use to muse if I put the money I spent on computer gear back in the day instead into woodworking tools, I'd not only have a bigger, better shop than Norm Abrahm, all of the tools would probably still work.
The answer is in the article, you just have to read it:
San Francisco tested out a generic $630 wire mesh trash can but chose the Slim Silhouette because it found the Silhouette’s opening, with a snorkel design, was better at preventing rummaging and its stainless steel body was easier to maintain.
The eye-popping price of these modern trash cans has little to do with permitting and red tape, like stories of $1.7m public toilets. Thoughtful designs are more expensive, and many cities believe it’s necessary to pay the premium.
I think the parent's point stands. There's a lot more pragmatic concern with the damage SpaceX could do in 2026, versus the damage Nazis could do in the 1960s.
reply