Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | mercutio2's commentslogin

Wealth taxes are very, very different from higher income taxes.

People are mad about buy-borrow-die, so they’re proposing extraordinary new measures.

Personally, I’d just make capital gains taxes apply at the “borrow” stage to actually fix the problem. That would have a host of compliance issues but they’d be localized in the finance industry which already has an army of people figuring out compliance.


But they made exactly the same arguments against it, and it was bullshit.

What toolchain are you going to use with the local model? I agree that’s a Strong model, but it’s so slow for be with large contexts I’ve stopped using it for coding.

I have my own agent harness, and the inference backend is vLLM.

Can you tell me more about your agent harness? If it’s open source, I’d love to take it for a spin.

I would happily use local models if I could get them to perform, but they’re super slow if I bump their context window high, and I haven’t seen good orchestrators that keep context limited enough.


Curious how you handle sharding and KV cache pressure for a 120b model. I guess you are doing tensor parallelism across consumer cards, or is it a unified memory setup?

I don't, fits on my card with the full context, I think the native MXFP4 weights takes ~70GB of VRAM (out of 96GB available, RTX Pro 6000), so I still have room to spare to run GPT-OSS-20B alongside for smaller tasks too, and Wayland+Gnome :)

I thought the RTX 6000 Ada was 48GB? If you have 96GB available that implies a dual setup, so you must be relying on tensor parallelism to shard the model weights across the pair.

RTX Pro 6000 - 96GB VRAM - Single card

This is one of the very few non-money-laundering use cases for crypto.

I would support a “5 cents per unsolicited email” email system, in a similar way. If you make it a mildly enjoyable $5/hour task to read the first sentence or two of your spam folder, the overall internet would be better.


Maybe it's because I loved the books, but I loathed the Netflix adaptation. Possibly the worst sci-fi adaptation I've ever seen.

The casting was OK, but they mangled the plot and motivations of every character nearly beyond recognition!


The Apple TV (the device) has a “stuff this user watches” app (called Apple TV) which has a tiny subset of its features dedicated to AppleTV+ (the service).

Netflix refuses to participate in “stuff this user watches”, it would be trivial to do, but Neflix jealously guards its viewership numbers and I expect this is the main reason they don’t do it. That and… they’d rather you just browse Netflix and not watch other services.

The “stuff this user watches” app is very useful! I like it a lot, when I’m not watching Netflix stuff! It works with every service except Netflix!

But the moment the family shifts over to watching some Netflix show, it forces us out of the habit of using the TV app, and then we go back to the annoying “spend 90 seconds trying to find what we were watching on Hulu” experience, which is worse in every way.


Why are you assuming active heat transfer? Passive is the way to go.


Yes, so?

Everyone keeps talking past each other on this, it seems.

“Generating power in space is easy, but ejecting heat is hard!”

Yes.

“That means you’d need huge radiators!”

Yes.

OK, we’re back to “how expensive/reliable is your giant radiator with a data center attached?”

We don’t know yet, but with low launch costs, it isn’t obviously crazy.


Yeah. A City on Mars made me want to throw the book at the window so many times. Building and tearing down straw-men right and left. Almost every legitimate note of caution suffered from the nirvana fallacy.


There’s a weird thing in discussions about space. Lots of people just don’t like space, it makes them think they’re being blasted with science fiction.

So much criticism of space seems to fall into a few categories:

  1. They think there were ever any serious engineers who thought STS was a good idea, (rather than congressional-pork, which is what it always was), and thus assume actual space technologists are basically always wrong about the possibility of ever creating anything new and reliable
  2. They think cost/kg to LEO is somehow a physical law, and can never be improved on
  3. If they accept that SpaceX might actually have better technology that allows new things, they still refuse to wrap their heads around 2-3 orders of magnitude cost reductions due to improved technology, they update, but mentally on the order of “it will be 50% cheaper, no big deal”
  4. They just hate Elon Musk. On this one, I’m at least sympathetic
Space based data centers are probably not going to happen in the next decade, but most criticism (including this article) just reads as head-in-the-sand criticism, not serious analysis. I’m still waiting for more serious cost-benefit analysis assuming realistic Starship mass budgets.

If I worked for SpaceX, I imagine I’d focus more on just getting more Starlink mass in orbit for at least 3-4 years, but after that, we might have spare capacity we might want to spend on orbital power loads like this.


Things like Golden Dome ruin it for everyone..


You mean, not very much? Everything about space-based anything is dependent in the short to medium term on Starship making mass to LEO cost about as much as air freight.

Starship, at least as a rapidly reusable second stage, may fail, rockets are hard. But you aren’t really engaging with people’s dreams if you start from “we don’t have access to the technologies that appear to represent a one to two order of magnitude cost shift”.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: