It's basically just min/maxing of attributes to fit the specific role. A throwing QB probably doesn't need to be the fastest man alive but a few pounds of extra fat will help protect against injuries.
Now does that actually make patrick mahomes more athletic than some random person that can run faster and lift more? I would say no, but he's definitely a better QB.
The increase in efficiency is usually accompanied with the process of commoditization as stuff get cheaper to develop, which is very bad news for nvidia.
If you dont need the super high end chips than Nvidia loses it's biggest moat and ability to monopolize the tech, CUDA isn't enough.
> Nvidia loses it's biggest moat and ability to monopolize the tech, CUDA isn't enough
CUDA is plenty for right now. AMD can't/won't get their act together with GPU software and drivers. Intel isn't in much better of a position than AMD and has a host of other problems. It's also unlikely the "let's just glue a thousand ARM cores together" hardware will work as planned and still needs the software layer.
CUDA won't be an Nvidia moat forever but it's a decent moat for the next five years. If a company wants to build GPU compute resources it will be hard to go wrong buying Nvidia kit. At least from a platform point of view.
CUDA will still be a moat for the near future and nobody is saying that Nvidia will die, but the thing is that Nvidia margins will drop like crazy and so will it's valuation. It will go back down to being a "medium tech" company.
Basically training got way cheaper, and for inference you don't really need nvidia, so even if there's an increase for cheaper chips there's no way the volume makes up for the loss of margin.
No, Nvidia's margins won't drop at all and the proof for this is Apple.
The units of AI accelerators will explode, the market will explode.
At the end of the day, Nvidia will have 20-30% of the unit share in AI HW and 70-80% of the profit share in the AI HW market. Just like Apple makes 3x the money compared to the rest of the smartphone market.
Jensen has considered Nvidia a premium vendor for 2 decades and track record of Nvidia's margins show this.
And while Nvidia remains a high premium AI infrastructure vendor, they will also add lots of great SW frameworks to make even more profit.
Omniverse has literally no competition. That digital world simulation combines all of Nvidia's expertise (AI HW, Graphics HW, Physics HW, Networking, SW) into one huge product. And it will be a revolution because it's the first time we will be able to finally digitalize the analog world. And Nvidia will earn tons of money because Omniverse itself is licensed, it needs OVX systems (visual part) and it needs DGX systems (AI part).
Don't worry, Nvidia's margins will be totally fine. I would even expect them to be higher in 10 years than they are today. Nobody believes that but that's Jensen's goal.
There is a reason why Nvidia has always been the company with the highest P/S ratio and anyone who understands why, will see the quality management immediately.
If medium to long term you believe the space will eventually get commoditized I the bear case is obvious. And based on history there's a pretty high likelihood for that to happen.
There is a subway that connects Manhattan and NJ, called the PATH. Unfortunately it’s run by a completely different organization, which I agree is silly.
It would make much more sense for it to be unified with the MTA subway, with more connectivity. My dream would be a single seat ride from Newark Airport to Atlantic Terminal in Brooklyn, via Newark Penn Station and World Trade Center.
There was also once a proposal to have the 7 train go out to Seacaucus Junction, which would be huge for accessing the East Side for NJers.
Taxi companies don't like rail going to US airports. With JFK you have to take one train, then change, then another train, then you're at the equivalent of Paddington. Would be like having to change at Hayes+Harlington. Luton has this, but that's the odd one.
From Newark I think it's a bus to a train station, then a train to NY Penn.
The "default" way to get from Heathrow/Gatwick/Stansted to London is a train from the terminal to the centre, typically multiple options.
The default way in the US is taxi. Massively inefficient, but a lot of people make a lot of money from it. Why have a plane load of people on a single train costing $5k, when you can have 200 taxis costing $20k, generating 4 times the GDP.
In London, you also have the Piccadilly line depending upon where you're going and how much luggage you have (many of the London tube stations are pretty awful in terms of accessibility as I discovered on a trip where I had heavier luggage than normal last year).
Since 2022 there's also the Elizabeth Line, which uses the same tracks as the Heathrow Express, but then continues under Central London and far to the east.
It takes 27 rather than 15 minutes to Paddington, but it's also half the price of the Heathrow Express.
Right. But I usually stay near Trafalgar Square and the Piccadilly line is much more convenient for that. (Though I will be taking the Elizabeth line from LHR my next trip because I'm initially going to Shoreditch. And, yes, Heathrow Express is something of a rip-off which the airport steers you towards.)
If you're talking about underwater, I don't think that's the problem compared to running track through populated areas, whether that's through tunnels, cut-and-cover, at-grade or viaduct.
That's just false. The Arab minority in Israel has right to vote, the right to establish political parties, freedom of expression, freedom of association, free press, religious autonomy, separate educational systems, legal rights, etc.
Yes there are differences, but claiming that Arab israelis only receive "token rights" is a far cry from the truth. Of course this doesn't mean theres' no racism, but that's a different issue.
They don't have a right to own land in 90% of the country. You literally have to be Jewish to buy land. Also Jewish people started burning down buildings full of Arabs during the war. They can get evicted from their houses. They are discriminated against. And I don't think you're a full citizen if you can't even buy and keep property.
In the case of the ILA, you can buy it if you have full citizenship, but not if you are an Arab with a residence permit but not full citizenship. You can however buy land if you are Jewish and not a citizen. I find this somewhat racist still. Moreover, according to the above source from Human Rights Watch, Arabs still are de facto prevented from leasing 80% of the land. So my figure is not that far off. You also didn't dispute the fact that they have been evicted and contained. Which is also mentioned here.
They have also been steadily changing the rights of Arab Israelis over the course of 2024, as if their collective punishment of Palestinians needs to extend even to their own citizens, just in case: https://www.ft.com/content/3d57cf7c-a097-4e86-8f39-0f7720508...
I cannot find a source about the exact incident I was citing about arson perpetuated on Arab Israelis. It was a long time ago I read about that. So I will concede that seeing as I think my other points hold strongly. There are several incidents of arson and increased unpoliced violence in East Jeruselam and the West Bank though. I find this as clear evidence that the war crimes going on in Gaza are not just about retaliation to Hamas, but are part of a larger racist issue, since Palestinians in the West Bank logically do not deserve punishment for things Hamas did, but are being killed at far higher rates since this war. I say higher because children were always being killed every week in the West Bank, increasingly so in 2023.
> seeing as I think my other points hold strongly.
But they aren't. The initial claim was about Arabs in israel (aka israeli arabs), not Palestinians in the west bank / east Jerusalem which is a different topic.
Now don't get me wrong, i'm not gonna protect Israel's treatment to it's arab population, but let's get some facts straight. In terms of human rights you're still better off being arab israeli than being an arab citizen in most of the arab countries.
Bro when I said my other comments, I was speaking about the points ABOVE that statement. The ones I provided sources for. Both of which are about Arab Israeli citizens. Most of what I provided was specifically about Arab Israeli citizens. Are you being purposefully dense? I said I don't have evidence about the burning of Arab Israeli buildings BUT I have provided other points pertaining to Arab Israeli citizens that do hold up.
Anyway, saying "there's human rights violations but other countries have more human rights violations" is stupid and doesn't prove the point that Zionists are trying to make, that they are the victims in this situation and are not racists with an intent to genocide. Go say to black Americans in 20th century fighting for full civil rights "well at least you're not still in Africa, you'd probably be starving so you should really be grateful for this wonderful fair country". Those are two seperate issues.
Please read further on the first one. It talks about who can lease the land, what authorities its held by, and how Arab Israelis are limited in leasing the land.
I didn't realise the second one was behind a paywall. I do not have a subscription but it let me view it. Let me see if I can find an internet archive link and I'll put it below this text in an edit.
As someone who was defintely pro-palestinian and now changed his stance to "eeeeh it's complicated", I want to thank you for taking the time to rebutt falsehoods and to call out exaggerations rather than engaging with ready-made partisan talking points. I know doing that sometimes feels like pissing in the wind but in my case, it really helped question what I thought I knew and to admit that I was probably more ignorant than I thought.
I'm baffled by how you've changed your stance in such a way. I sympathise with the Israeli people for thinking it's complicated and I understand that we need to consider them and their livelihoods and trauma when talking about the situation, but at the end of the day, what Zionist project requires genocide and thier government subsquently is quite happy to slaughter people like dogs. No amount of "the other side did some bad things too" justifies that when the Israeli's are the only ones who have the power to stop it.
You are trying to get me to engage to the claims you are making, I will not do that. Instead I will tell you about my stance change assuming you care. This is not about "the other sides did some bad things too", it's about the claims made by the pro-palestinians and the reality of it, which I think this thread illustrates quite well. On one side you have someone who cares about understanding the situation before making any claims and one the other hand you have someone (you) who is on his morality horse kinda saying that the facts, details in your eyes, don't really matter since you are on the side of the opressed. Attempting to dumb down the situation to an oppressor/opressed schema might be true in present day at an abstract level but does not help anyone. It's easy to be right, just make a broad abstract claim, it's much harder to be relevant. I know how you feel, I felt just the same, you are high on your emotion : It seems like for once it's a clear oppressor/oppressed situation, like the one you have read in History books but ask yourself "Why doesn't everyone see it like I do ?". Is it only because of the undeniable Israeli state propaganda directed at the western world and everyone is blind to it ? Or is it because people much smarter than us have tried to solve the situation, and failed ?
Also do you care at all about a solution that would work for both parties ? Or do you only care that one party is right and the other, more powerful one, should vanish into thin air because they are wrong ?
> Or is it because people much smarter than us have tried to solve the situation, and failed ?
There are also a lot of people much smarter than us saying that the core parts of the Palestinian narrative are true (Nakba, land theft, apartheid and occupation, and yes, genocide, not talking about the religious Islamist stuff). E.g. the heads if pretty much all UN orgs and aid agencies.
Yeah its really not that people smarter than us have tried to solve the situation. It's that people much smarter than us with selfish motives (Israel and US) have engineered the fucked up situation we see now. And the people who are smart and want to fix the situation (UN, leftist Israeli academics, Palestinian leaders) are shut down immediately by Israel and the US, therefore blocking any progress.
I dunno man I've had a lot of people accuse me of being blinded by emotion on this but I am the only person who gave sources in this conversation. I've done a lot of reading, including of pro-Israel sources. The facts of the matter hold up. Israel is in the wrong. Again, the other side obviously did bad things but Israel is the one trying to create an ethnostate and then is acting surprised by the adverse consequences of that. Israel also is the only side with the power to stop this.
Anyway, I'll go back to being overly emotional by citing sources while the other side cites zero sources but is 'reasonable' because of their aesthetic of conservatism.
Edit: Also in terms of why do I think other people think differently, there are a lot of reasons. One is the genuine trauma of the holocaust. I totally understand why Jewish people felt like they could no longer conscience living anywhere other than a Jewish state after hundreds of years of pogroms leading to the holocaust. I also understand why they see anyone who is against them as antisemetic. There's lots of overlap between antisemitism and antizionism even if they are definitely not equivalent. I also understand that many people are scared of the instability in the region that be caused by the loss of a friendly westernised state and the possible formation of yet another total disaster of an Arab government. I also understand that it is not the choice of people who are grandchildren of settlers to have been born there and it is naive of me to dismiss the trauma of living in such a war torn place even from the more privileged side. None of these things makes it right to ethnically cleanse a people. That's the bottom line. And until we get Israel to admit that, we can't move forward, because the Palestinians cannot be gaslit out of their day to day experience of brutal military occupation and racist apartheid. They cannot be gaslit out of believing in the corpses around them.
Of course I don't believe we just dispose of Israelis for the sins of their forefathers. I believe they either need to give up a lot of land or they need to concede to having a multi ethnic state. Maybe the first one and then a plan towards the second so that neither side feels contained. This is easier said than done but it is what has to be done. Just like how South Africans had to forgive each other and the Irish and the English had to forgive each other, just on a more extreme scale. It's obviously a crazy thing to have to do, but you know what's worse? Continuing with a system that necessitates genocide.
I find it quite insulting that you see someone having the pro-Palestinian view and you think "oh yeah you're probably all for genociding the Israeli's to get your way"
That's unfair to your interlocutor who politely engaged with your point and tried give his source once, especially since you started with a false statement that you backed away from (with sources, to your credit).
I don't think you are blinded by emotions but "high" on them btw. I do not negate the fact that you are an intelligent, reasoning being. And it's fine, we all get emotional about things.
I understand how appearing reasonable is part of the aesthetics of conservatism but I still wouldn't trust someone who seem engaged in overtly motivated reasoning to get to the truth of something, and I am speaking of both sides here. If you don't show me your own doubts, I will doubt you.
Edit:
You show a lot of understanding and I think that's a prerequisite for any serious conversation but you also see how it is not very practical for any online conversation to have a wall of "I understand that..."
> I find it quite insulting that you see someone having the pro-Palestinian view and you think "oh yeah you're probably all for genociding the Israeli's to get your way"
Well you see the problem, like any dispute in any relationship, it's an endless chain of "I feel insulted that..." unless you have a strict framework for discussion where everyone feels heard.
Of course I don't see pro-Palestinians as having genocidal intent (and I take offence that you think I do :). I was one and I did not, but I also understand that an israeli person would be concerned about violent reprisals and wouldn't trust high on reighteouness pro-palestinians who would absolve themselves saying "Well they reap what they sow".
That's why peace is hard, it takes a saint-like dedication to dialogue and gandhi-like refusal of revenge.
I agree that a "they reap what they sow" attitude can be tempting but is totally unproductive. You're absolutely right that we need real empathetic dialogue from gandhi-like figures. That was what I was trying to say in my last response. If the Israelis can admit that their genocidal actions have been wrong and that they have to concede some of their land for paece and the Palestinians can acknowledge the Isrealis generational trauma, welcome their need for sanctuary and disband Hamas then we could get somewhere. What I object to is that most of the world seems to believe that the Israelis should not have to admit to their own faults and concede anything. Hamas is a necessary resistance force in the eyes of the Palestinians if the Israelis continue to beleive that genocidal action is justified. I say in the eyes of the Palestinians because this may seem ludicrous to some of us, but that really doesn't matter. What matters is dealing with the greivances of the people in the area once and for all.
> Yes there are differences, but claiming that Arab israelis only receive "token rights" is a far cry from the truth
Aren't the rights only subject to them being an ethnic minority in Israel? According to nation-state law, they could not be allowed to retain those rights if they became the ethnic majority
Now does that actually make patrick mahomes more athletic than some random person that can run faster and lift more? I would say no, but he's definitely a better QB.