I am not an Alien die hard fan, but I’d say that is definitely a factor. The movie reuses a lot of ideas from the older movies and some of the references are pretty on the nose. Still an entertaining movie though.
As a comparison i think Prey (2022) did a better job in being a fresh entry to a similar and established franchise (predator in this case) and standing on it’s own.
If we are talking the manufacturing side, rather than design/software i am very curious to see how SIMC develops. You are absolutely right that there is a big advantage for the second mover, since they can avoid dead ends and already know on an abstract level what is working. And diminishing returns also help make gaps be slightly less relevant.
However i think we can’t just apply the same timeline to them and say “they have 7nm now” and it took others x years to progress from there to 5nm or 3nm, because these steps include the major shift from DUV to EUV, which was in the making for a very long time. And that’s a whole different beast compared to DUV, where they are also probably still relying on ASML machines for the smallest nodes (although i think producing those domestically is much more feasible). Eventually they’ll get there, but i think this isn’t trivial and will take more than 2 years for sure.
On the design side vs Nvidia the hyperscalers like Alibaba/Tencent/Baidu or maybe even a smaller newcomer might be able to create something competitive for their specific usecases (like the Google TPUs). But Nvidia isn’t standing still either, so i think getting close to parity will be extremely hard there aswell.
Of course, the price gap will shrink at the same rate as ROCm matures and customers feel its safe to use AMD hardware for training.
Well to what degree ROCm matures and closes the gap is probably the question. Like i said, i agree that their hardware seems quite capable in many ways, although my knowledge here is quite limited. But AMD so far hasn’t really shown that they can compete with Nvidia on the software side.
As far as Intel goes, being slow in my reply helps my point. Just today Intel canceled their next-generation GPU Falcon Shore, making it an internal development step only. As much as i am rooting for them, it will need a major shift in culture and talent for them to right the ship. Gaudi 3 wasn’t successful (i think they didn’t even meet their target of $500mio sales) and now they probably don’t have any release in 2025, assuming Jaguar Lake is 2026 since Falcon Shore was slated for end of this year. In my books that is the definition of being behind more than 1 year, considering they are not even close to parity right now.
Yeah. I don’t believe market value is a great indicator in this case. In general, I would say that capital markets are rational at a macro level, but not micro. This is all speculation/gambling.
I have to concede that point to some degree, since i guess i hold similar views with Tesla’s value vs the rest of the automotive Industry. But i still think that the basic hirarchy holds true with nvidia being significantly ahead of the pack.
My guess is that AMD and Intel are at most 1 year behind Nvidia when it comes to tech stack. “China”, maybe 2 years, probably less.
Imo you are too optimistic with those estimations, particularly with Intel and China, although i am not an expert in the field.
As i see it AMD seems to have a quite decent product with their instinct cards in the server market on the hardware side, but they wish they’d have something even close to CUDA and its mindshare. Which would take years to replicate. Intel wish they were only a year behind Nvidia. And i’d like to comment on China, but tbh i have little to no knowledge of their state in GPU development. If they are “2 years, probably less” behind as you say, then they should have something like the rtx 4090, which was released end of 2022. But do they have something that even rivals the 2000 or 3000 series cards?
However, if you can make chips with 80% performance at 10% price, its a win. People can continue to tell themselves that big tech always will buy the latest and greatest whatever the cost. It does not make it true.
But the issue is they all make their chips at the same manufacturer, TSMC, even Intel in the case of their GPUs. So they can’t really differentiate much on manufacturing costs and are also competing on the same limited supply. So no one can offer 80% of performance at 10% price, or even close to it. Additionally everything around the GPU (datacenters, rack space, power useage during operation etc.) also costs, so it is only part of the overall package cost and you also want to optimize for your limited space. As i understand it datacenter building and power delivery for them is actually another limiting factor right now for the hyperscalers.
Google, Meta and Amazon already make their own chips. That’s probably true for DeepSeek as well.
Google yes with their TPUs, but the others all use Nvidia or AMD chips to train. Amazon has their Graviton CPUs, which are quite competitive, but i don’t think they have anything on the GPU side. DeepSeek is way to small and new for custom chips, they evolved out of a hedge fund and just use nvidia GPUs as more or less everyone else.
Looking at the market cap of Nvidia vs their competitors the market belives it is, considering they just lost more than AMD/Intel and the likes are worth combined and still are valued at $2.9 billion.
And with technology i mean both the performance of their hardware and the software stack they’ve created, which is a big part of their dominance.
I have to disagree with that, because this solution isn’t free either.
Asking them to regulate their use requires them to build excess capacity purely for those peaks (so additional machinery), to have more inventory in stock, and depending on how manual labor intensive it is also means people have to work with a less reliable schedule. With some processes it might also simply not be able to regulate them up/down fast enough (or at all).
This problem is simply a function of whether it is cheaper to a) build excess capacity or b) build enough capacity to meet demand with steady production and add battery storage as needed.
Compared to most manufacturing lines battery tech is relatively simple tech, requries little to no human labor and still makes massive gains in price/performance. So my bet is that it’ll be the cheaper solution.
That said it is of course not a binary thing and there might be some instances where we can optimize energy demand and supply, but i think in the industry those will happen naturally through market forces. However this won’t be enough to smooth out the gap difference in the timing of supply/demand.
It’s a reaction to thinking China has better AI
I don’t think this is the primary reason behind Nvidia’s drop. Because as long as they got a massive technological lead it doesn’t matter as much to them who has the best model, as long as these companies use their GPUs to train them.
The real change is that the compute resources (which is Nvidia’s product) needed to create a great model suddenly fell of a cliff. Whereas until now the name of the game was that more is better and scale is everything.
China vs the West (or upstart vs big players) matters to those who are investing in creating those models. So for example Meta, who presumably spends a ton of money on high paying engineers and data centers, and somehow got upstaged by someone else with a fraction of their resources.
I feel like i have to add it to my watchlist simply to be able to have an informed opinion, even if it isn’t necessarily what i’d be drawn to.
It’s great to see there’s finally a trans actress to receive an Oscar nomination, but the performance wasn’t amazing, and I’d say Demi Moore or Mikey Madison had much better material to work with and really showed their talent.
If it were just that, a single (or a few) nomination, but it just got 13 oscar nominations, twice for best original song. So depending on how you count the double entry it’s the most nominated film of the year or tied with The Brutalist at 10.
I skipped 2 on purpose. Dune: Part Two (not watching until I finish the books)
When you write books, plural, do you just want to read them all while not having the movies influence your own imagination? which i could totally understand. Because otherwise from a spoiler perspective the two movies just adapt the first novel.
(too overhyped, if you need $150 millions to spend on marketing something, it’s not worth watching in my mind).
I was under the impression that many large blockbuster productions nowadays have similar sized marketing budgets. Maybe $150m is a bit on the high side for Wicked, but from a quick search Dune Part II also seems like it had a roughly $100m one.
I heard of Nosferatu, Inside Out 2 and Gladiator II, but many of the other entries didn’t even catch my eye throughout the year.
Tbh not suprising for some of the reasons mentioned above. And i think particular something like Anora gets a lot of buzz on the critic side, but hardly any mainstream attention. So you’d have to actively pay attention to that.
Looking at my stats, It has been a light year on movies for me. Only 9 movies I saw were released in 2024.
Tbh while i thought that there were some great movies, it probably was a light year for movies in general, at least for me. I’d say it was more dominated by the large flops we had: Joker 2, Megalopolis, Madame Web, The Crow, Borderlands and so on.
I’d say it depends on how much new releases you’ve seen this year. But while I’d say having not seen a single one (assuming you’ve watched a decent number) is maybe a bit surprising, I can totally see reasons how someone could have ended up not seeing a single one of them.
Many are also still just in cinemas (like the brutality) or only available for digital rental, not streaming. With Wicked and Emilia Perez you have musicals that many (me included) don’t care for as much. You probably won’t go see a complete unknown or better man, if you aren’t a fan of the artist. And I could go on and list reasons for all other films.
But I’d be curious: of the ones you have seen this year which stood out to you or would you have liked to see nominated?
Personally from the nominated ones I’ve seen
In cinema: Dune part II, Alien Romulus, Nosferatu
At a festival: the substance, black box diaries
And otherwise I’ve seen Anora, Conclave, The wild robot, gladiator II
The 3 i look forward to the most (2025 releases only)
“A Big Bold Beautiful Journey”: Directed by Kogonada, who made some of my favorite movies (Columbus and After Yang), Colin Farrell and Phoebe Waller-Bridge? Sign me up
“Warfare”: With Alex Garlands track record that’s another no brainer to me
“Mickey 17”: I’m a sucker for good science fiction. Directed by Bong Joon-ho with Robert Pattinson and Steven Yeun? Yep that does it.
Honorable mentions:
Avatar 3: For the visual spectacle and will certainly go watch it on the best screen possible.
“Tron: Ares”: Not a huge fan of Jared Leto, but he also isn’t a dealbreaker. He was in the new Bladerunner and that one turned out well anyways.
“Frankenstein” by Guillermo del Toro should come out this year and sounds interesting
“Death of a Unicorn”: Purely based on the premise
“28 years later”: Actually still haven’t come around to watch 28 Weeks Later, but liked 28 days.
Also looking forward to watching “the Brutalist”, but that was already released, just haven’t come around to watching it yet. And ofc there are plenty of movies far out like the next Christopher Nolan movie, but that isn’t coming this year.
edited in avatar, because I forgot we get one this year
Some thoughts (althought not having seen many of the nominations yet, e.g. the Brutalist):
Considering the critical acclaim it got, i am somewhat suprised by the complete lack of nominations for “Challengers”
Glad to see Dune Part II and hope it wins some awards, could have maybe also deserved a nom in directing?
Haven’t seen it, but Emilia Pérez seems to be quite controversial in its reception and got a ton of nominations
For best international feature film “All We Imagine as Light” might have also been worth a nomination
edit: Totally forgot that Civil War was also this year. That could have maybe been a nominee for sound design?
I’m gonna reserve my judgement on that one until it is completet, but it certainly was one of the strongest first seasons ever. But i am somewhat scarred from Westworld that started equally strong and maintain the quality.
Imo “The Good Place” is an example of a series that did it right. They had an easy setup to just keep the formula, but instead every season they changed the setting and moved forward. I hope Severence manages a similar standard. I think Silo somewhat fell into this trap for the second season, but was still very good.
If i remember correctly compared to the books they spent way more time in the first Silo and the rebellion, which took out some momentum.
I meant success in the context of what a dating app should achieve: Matching suitable partners.
But you are of course right that for the company success is profit and the rest are just variables to be optimized towards that goal.
Yep, it’s based on the book series. It does deviate from the source material in some ways, as do most adaptions, but the major story beats are (and most certainly will be) the same.
That and at least here in Germany we also use tons of land to grow energy plants such as rapeseed (apparently that alone uses 10% of all farming land), which imo is just incredibly inefficient. In case of an emergency at this scale i’d imagine that would be turned back to producing something like weat.
We could also simply produce a bit less meat, which is similarly inefficient in howmuch you need to feed the animals per kg of product.
They don’t learn the lesson, because they don’t want to. And your examples imo show the problem.
forgiving debts, pardoning marinuana offences
These are not solutions, they are bandaids that like a drug keep you dependent on politicians repeating them again and again. Which of course is nice when your only goal is to get relected, but longterm that magic wears off.
Also regarding cost: I have yet to hear how a dating app solves the paradox that success means losing a customer. The incentives of the company and customer are not aligned and actually quite the opposite.
The company wants you to stay and spend as much as possible on the platform (optimizing to keep you just engaged enough to stick with it), whereas the ideal outcome for the customer means not needing the app in as little time as possible.
Wikipedia on rooting.
Rooting is the process by which users of Android devices can attain privileged control (known as root access) over various subsystems of the device, usually smartphones and tablets
You can install apps from other sources without root access on Android. But some may need those extra permissions to function.
What I don’t quite understand is how there is 1.5 billion in a single wallet. Or how are these things structured?
This article puts their total assets under management at $15.7b, which are held in different cryptocurrencies with ethereum at just above $5b.
So I am wondering how they have more than 1/6 of their Ethereum in a single wallet or were these multiple that were connected and got compromised through the same vulnerability? How expensive is it to have more individual wallets? Would it not be feasible to have it split in something like $100m chunks? Or any other more moderate size.