I have not yet read the above linked article, so maybe it already says (or refutes) this, but the long-held rumor was that Wirecard was a useful mechanism for Russians to move around dark money--e.g. for sanctions evasion or payola.
Oh, I understand statistics, that's not what I'm saying: I'm plainly saying that so far, with anything I threw at it, the gov.uk inflation calculator is a plain lie.
In my experience--which is anecdotal, and thus shouldn't be trusted--nearly any discussion of inflation involves people waving around their untrustworthy anecdotal experience as evidence that the statistics are wrong.
This is a phenomenon of the last two decades. Before the fed started cutting rates after 9/11 (to support the country, the financial markets, the housing markets, etc.) both money market and savings accounts (you had to choose a good bank) usually gave positive inflation adjusted return.
Seems to me Treasury bills meaningfully outpace inflation, on average: https://www.bauer.uh.edu/rsusmel/other/lrret1.htm. But I was talking about cash accounts, which typically pay lower interest rates than T-bills or CDs (as noted on the above link).
In the late 1990s my savings account at the EmigrantDirect was paying about 7% with inflation around 3%.
This was not a term deposit, but a regular account, either itself with check-writing privileges or linked to a checking account with 1-3 day transfers. I think MMFs with check-writing paid similar interest, although not 100% sure as I never put my money there. Those were cash accounts as I could withdraw any amount, up to 100% of the account any time without any penalties.
Owning shares in the entities for which money for goods and services pass through is the way to keep up with inflation. If I buy things from Costco/Apple/Toyota/Novartis/etc, then they increase prices, then their share prices go up accordingly.
I'm confused. The article from September 1 linked to here is strangely future-tense ("But the firm’s latest investment in 10,000 of the company’s H100 GPUs dwarfs the power of this supercomputer....This AI cluster, worth more than $300 million, will offer a peak performance...").
It links to a Tom's Hardware article (https://www.tomshardware.com/news/teslas-dollar300-million-a...) from August 28 that says "Tesla is about to flip the switch on its new AI cluster, featuring 10,000 Nvidia H100 compute GPUs") and says "Tesla is set to launch its highly-anticipated supercomputer on Monday..." (presumably the September 1 event).
So, like, does Tesla actually have 10k H100s? Or do they have an order for 10k H100s? Or an intention to buy 10k H100s?
I don't mean to snipe, but this article doesn't seem to rise to the extremely high editorial standards of such tech-press luminaries as "TechRadar" and "Hacker News".
So another guy who claims to be a Tesla employee says (again, strangely future tense) that this is true? I mean, I am willing to believe--'cause he paid $20 for a blue check--that he probably is a Tesla employee.
But the use of future tense is a bit weird, right? And the lack of any followup?
> A “random Twitter post by some guy who runs an online clothing company” is definitely a wrong assumption.
I guess I'm old. Back in my day, "evidence" wasn't some random dude's online posts. But I know things have changed. ;)
So, yes, I can sorta imagine Tesla pre-ordered 2% of global supply of H100s early in 2023 and was bragging about it at the end of August just 'cause.
But I can also imagine this is smoke and mirrors, and they have, like, a handful with the rest on backorder, and we haven't heard more about it 'cause Tesla doesn't have marketing people, it just has wahoos who post things on Twitter.
> So another guy who claims to be a Tesla employee says (again, strangely future tense) that this is true? I mean, I am willing to believe--'cause he paid $20 for a blue check--that he probably is a Tesla employee.
Another case of misuse? Here’s a tip for you. When you see a company logo/icon on someone's Twitter/X profile. That means they are verified to be affiliated with that org.
“Accounts affiliated with the organization will receive an affiliate badge on their profile with the organization’s logo, and will be featured on the organization’s Twitter profile, indicating their affiliation. “
> I guess I'm old. Back in my day, "evidence" wasn't some random dude's online posts. But I know things have changed. ;)
I linked a video where CNBC was interviewing Sawyer but it seems that you didn’t even bother to check it.
This seems to be the problem today. People refuse to do the bare minimum (which is not even much) required for critical thinking. Instead of verifying information, people tend to uncritically repeat inaccurate assumptions, even when provided with additional information in good faith.
Sure. I’m being a bit snarky. But I think the point stands that a single tweet from an employee saying “we’re about to do $thing” doesn’t exactly mean that, two months later, we should be reading a story whose sole origin is that tweet as evidence that $thing actually ended up happening.
Like, whats the actual news story here?
Totally agree there’s a lack of critical thinking at play.
Also, I think the X.com links only work if you have a login or something, fyi.
> What makes you think that Telsa, a company with far less AI workers and knowledge, an far less money than the above companies can out design and out build them?
Presumably because Elon himself will be involved in the design, and Elon, as we all know, is one of the world's great thinkers. ;)
Do you mind explaining what makes him good at it? Pay? Atmosphere? Management style?
From what I heard about SpaceX it seems to be a place grads go to burn out while being paid below market rate simply because they're excited about the idea. Maybe that impression is wrong, so I'd like to hear other perspectives.
The really obvious thing, if you watch the Freeze "best of" clip, is that most people have terrible running form. In most cases, I suspect I could tell who has a chance and who doesn't simply by looking at one stride from each competitor.
There are so many factors that go into biomechanics--I struggle to improve my own running form--but it's interesting to me that it comes together in such an obvious-at-a-glance factor as "looks fast."
In the Freeze video clip from TFA, the guy he's racing looks over his shoulder towards the end too. Its pretty hard to run forward with any velocity when looking backwards. That maneuver alone probably cost him a second, maybe more.
If someone has code execution in your browser, they can just steal your authentication cookies. They don't need your Passkey.
It's true that unsynced/hardware-bound credentials can help mitigate such attacks, but they cannot prevent it. The primary threat model of Passkeys is password theft via phishing, reuse, server-side compromise, etc.
If you want to use a USB security key, you still can--Passkeys do not take away from that. But most people are unwilling to go buy a USB key or carry one around, which is where Passkeys--arguably a bit less secure, but far better than the passwords they replace--are still a great step forward.
> If you want to use a USB security key, you still can--Passkeys do not take away from that.
I can't. Most of services I use do not support using Passkeys + a USB security key as second factor.
I'm very happy to use Passkeys (synced with my password manager, just like how I sync my password database now) + a USB security key. Unfortunately, most services force me to use Apple (or Google, Microsoft)-implemented Passkeys which are secured by their hardware devices so that they can also function as a second factor.
I don't think most services are requiring specific vendor attestation for Passkeys. I think most services are requiring authenticators that support user verification. Does your USB security key support uv?
Good point, it's not about specific vendor attestation. My Yubikey 5 supports user verification via PIN, but it can only store 25 resident keys :( That's my hardwares' fault.
