LtownTaxpayer
Well-Known Member
His handling of Martha Raddatz over the gang takeovers of apartment complexes in Arizona was hilarious.
Okay, JD Vance is growing on me
- Thread starter vraiblonde
- Start date
'I Don't Really Care, Margaret' Merchandise Sales Expected To Exceed $1 Billion Annually
U.S. — Meme-related revenue was predicted to hit an all-time high by the end of the year, as industry experts revealed "I don't really care, Margaret" merchandise sales were expected to exceed $1 billion annually.
babylonbee.com
Trump just said "he'll see" about Vance as POTUS - how about now?
The contrast between him and dumbshit Kamala is profound.
Clem72
Well-Known Member
Trump just said "he'll see" about Vance as POTUS - how about now?
Seems Ill timed. He says "The US is the leader in AI and I intend to keep it that way", while Chinese models (deepseek) are comparable but cheaper, and FRENCH models (Mistrals le chat) are now leading in capability and are orders (like two) of magnitude cheaper with their new chips. And speaking of Chips, the American Chips (Nvidia) are already falling behind as far as IP, and are NOT produced in America, while America's actual chips (Intel) are the laughingstock of the world right now.
But But, we have Google and OpenAI!!!! Where the former bought their way into the AI space multiple times (deep mind, anthropic, character.ai) and each time they release something based on the company they bought and then progression slows and eventually faulters as Meta/Google drives away the talent and squanders the tech. And OpenAI? Well, will Musk really let them Succeed or will they be regulated and sued out of the competition. And X.ai was never worth discussing to begin with.
The US had a brief moment when Crypto miners had TONS of extra Nvidia chips and LLMs were just coming online and ChatGPT made a splash. But that moment is already in the past. We aren't the leader in any single facet of AI, let alone whole industry.
LtownTaxpayer
Well-Known Member
Has DeepSeek been independently confirmed yet? They made a lot of claims but offered not a whiff of proof/documentation.
Clem72
Well-Known Member
Eh? They literally published the code. You, you personally, could download it and verify their claims yourself. Many others have.
LtownTaxpayer
Well-Known Member
So this is the AI that they used OpenAI to train - without paying or acknowledging at first. Same old intellectual property thievery.
Clem72
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure I see your point, OpenAI was "open", not to mention they didn't pay any of the people they took the data from to train their models. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
glhs837
Power with Control
Has anybody verified the hardware. Lots of folks in the know seem to think they had double or triple amount of hardware they claimed to have done it on
Clem72
Well-Known Member
Oh no doubt they did, no one seriously believes their hardware costs. On the other hand, every estimate I have seen still puts their model training costs well below the "leaders".
And that's old news now, have you seen the information about the Cerebras AI chips Mistral uses?
In any case, my point was that the US had a perfect storm of hardware, software, and venture capital that made us very briefly dominant in IA development and deployment. And now we have been equaled or surpassed in every category on multiple fronts and are at the mercy of other countries for our critical hardware.
So it just cracks me up when Vance stands up in front of the very people that just handed us our AI asses to rah rah about how good our AI is.
I think the question is more about the hardware than the software
Meanwhile, in Munich....
Ouch.
Ouch.
J.D. Vance’s Munich Wake-Up Call: Democracy, Censorship, and the Will of the People
I do not mean that everyone liked it.
For example, Boris Pistorius, the German Defense Minister, sniffed—or perhaps “smoldered” would be a more accurate term—that Vance’s remarks were “not acceptable.”
And then there is Bill Kristol, a sort of Greta Thunberg of the rancid former right, who thundered that Vance’s speech was “a humiliation for the U.S. and a confirmation that this administration isn’t on the side of the democracies.”
“The democracies.” What do you suppose Kristol means by that?
While you ponder that question, note that other people thought rather well of Vance’s speech. I thought it was excellent myself, but forget about my opinion. Jonathan Turley said that Vance’s speech was “perhaps the greatest single declaration uttered since ‘Ich bin ein Berliner.’” It was, Turley wrote elsewhere, “truly Churchillian—no less than the famous Iron Curtain speech in which Churchill dared the West to confront the existential dangers of communism.”
How can we explain the discrepancy: the outraged Pistorius/Kristol reaction and what I will call the Kimball/Turley reaction (though many people besides me applauded Vance’s speech)?
I think it comes down to how one understands that overdetermined, familiar yet often only half-understood word “democracy.”
Kristol said that Vance’s speech showed that the Trump administration was not “on the side of the democracies.”
What do you think of that claim?
I think poorly of it because I believe that a democracy is a political arrangement in which the people are sovereign.