2 x Nvidia Tesla P40 card for €660 is not a thing i consider to be "on a budget".
People can play with "small" or "medium" models less powerfull and cheaper cards. A Nvidia Geforce RTX 3060 card with "only" 12Gb VRAM can be found around €200-250 on second hand market (and they are around 300~350 new).
In my opinion, 48Gb of VRAM is overkill to call it "on a budget", for me this setup is nice but it's for semi-professional or professional usage.
There is of course a trade off to use medium or small models, but being "on a budget" is also to do trade off.
Yeesh, yeah, that was my first thought too - who’s budget??
less than $500 total feels more fitting as a ‘budget’ build - €1700 is more along the lines of ‘enthusiast’ or less charitably “I am rich enough to afford expensive hobbies”
If it’s your business and you expect to recoup the cost and write off the cost on your taxes, that’s one thing - but if you’re just looking to run a personal local LLM for funnies, that’s not an accessible price tag.
I suppose “or you could just buy a Mac” should have tipped me off though.
> What I do not understand in this case is why politics are involved?
This is a rural area with a lot of forest. The forestry service uses high concentrations of glyphosate dumped from helicopters to thin the forest.
The forestry service, and its use of glyphosphate is government, and with any government sponsored issue politics will make or break some politician's day.
The fact of the matter is, it doesn't matter that tests sampled at points show glyphosphate levels are well under the point where adverse risks occurred in the labs.
It is possible the chemicals are inducing toxins in microflora that are novel which then cause these issues. Regenesis had such an episodal plotline with fungal spores.
It is also equally possible that the safety testing didn't properly conform to standards, where adverse effects are found at much lower levels than advertised.
The cluster areas according to some news outlets seem correlated to the aerial spraying which is why there's such a push to find out what's going on, while the politicians at higher levels don't want to touch it with a ten foot pole.
Anything public ends up as political. Whether effort is spent on this or not is a question of money, and as always people have to advocate for their own health. Being alive is a political issue.
If it turns out to be some sort of public health issue such as use of toxins in industry, that's extremely political as well.
This just baseless conjecture, and even somewhat conspiracy-theory adjacent, but my best guess is one of the Irving families' companies is somehow involved here.
The Irving's, if you don't know, are one of the richest families in Canada, and effectively own the province of New Brunswick and run it like their own personal fiefdom. They are also heavily connected to both the Federal and Provincial conservative parties (And the Liberals too honestly), so I would assuage a guess that they had something to do with squashing the former investigation as they knew they were somehow culpable and used their cronies in the government to protect them from any potential liability.
Again, this is all just baseless conjecture, but it feels like at least a potentially reasonable explanation here, as it would be far from the first time billionaires used their wealth and political connections to kill an investigation into their own malfeasance.
This is a nice text, but it's heavenly oriented to the very upper class society.
The author talk a lot about "sexual books" of the times, but you will certainly not find the "Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure" (Fanny Hill) in the hand of a proper young woman.
(this stuff where costly rarities for men too).
It was far more simpler than this, no need for books.
Every rural girls and boys, and women and men living in a city did know, without any books,
what there is to know simply by looking at the animals in the farms
or the horses and dogs in the streets.
There was also the "education" at the wash-houses... The hubs to know everything there is to now at the time.
As for books in the 1700's over 60% of women were not literate so if one happened on one of the books it couldn't be read - but the illustrations would have been interesting to them.
I think that many of the poor lived in habitations where they all slept in one, unlit, room where they would get hints about sex from childhood.
Yeah. If anything, the 20th century was sort of a nadir for this sort of thing, as increasingly large portions of the population became more alienated from the natural world. That made it possible for young kids and teenagers to have no clear idea.
Sex and reproduction was no mystery to almost anyone historically. No doubt people, then as now, maintained various superstitions that coincidentally involved rationalizations for what they wanted to do anyway, but that's not really a matter of ignorance, so to speak. ("Come on, it's your first time, it will be OK, nothing will happen...whoops!" is not a matter of ignorance generally, but willful ignorance.)
It also covers a long time period. The period of extreme prudishness was fairly short, and happened during the Victorian era.
I have a book from the 1850s that was meant to (mis)inform on this topic. The whole masturbation makes people go blind nonsense. For people raised on this kind of book, I can believe that they would not understand sex. For people a few decades earlier, it would be a different story.
They where all nomadics, so the concept of a village did not exist yet. It was more like family related moving groups, or maybe "clans". That said, at an individual level there was probably a concept of people exchange when meeting another group, or banning of an individual.
yeah, can replace "village" with "group of people" like families or clans. Basically just 'we blame you for our problems so you need to leave' type of situation.
The view of the chinese researcher is in line with the Multiregional origin hypothesis of modern humans, where asian humans may partially come from asia. So his reply is not surprising.
Instead, the article follow the Out of Africa origin, and therefore did not explain the old chineses and autralian remains. The article try to explain this by saying than it's because this lines where extincts or than the dates are wrong, but this explanations are not very convincing.
What’s the most significant difference between the theories? The Wikipedia article says:
> “The primary competing scientific hypothesis is currently recent African origin of modern humans, which proposes that modern humans arose as a new species in Africa around 100-200,000 years ago, moving out of Africa around 50-60,000 years ago to replace existing human species such as Homo erectus and the Neanderthals without interbreeding.[5][6][7][8] This differs from the multiregional hypothesis in that the multiregional model predicts interbreeding with preexisting local human populations in any such migration.”
But it is a somewhat weird quote in the Wikipedia article. They’ve got the whole thing in quotes with multiple citations (so it isn’t clear which citation the quote comes from), it isn’t attributed to anybody in particular, and it doesn’t seem to be a very accurate description of what I though the consensus was, at least. (It is widely believed that humans interbred with other hominids, right?)
With recent genetics proofs than early human, did have interbreed with at last Neanderthals and Denisovans, this is now indeed more "true" than the "Only from Africa" hypothesis.
Thad said:
- as the time of the emergence of both theories there where no genetics evidences yet in one way or another
- the interbreeding with this two other species is still very small, (less than 5% of the actual genes). There is still no evidences for other important species like Homo erectus (or hedelbergensis, or florensis, etc.)
The truth maybe in between: a major pool of gene from Africa, but with small local parts from all over the ancient world.
The big remaining question is:
- Did sapiens and erectus had babies? And if yes, then, what was the results (Denisova or something else ?).
Bingo. Nearly every time you see a special carve out for the ancient ancestors of any particular country that is wildly contrary to established theories, it's less science and more politics.
This just happens to be China this time, instead of European countries.
In the Perrault version the shoes are undoubtedly in glass, not in furr (and so the Disney one are too).
There was a debate in France since the XIX century, but it's now concluded to "glass".
The example case of "sanitising" Cinderella, do not have a lot of sense. Sure if you compare the Disney version to the Grimm one, the Disney version look like far less horrific. But the Grimm one is just one of the many versions of Cinderella.
The (probably) oldest know version is the story of Rhodopis, where there is only an eagle who bring the shoe of a woman to the king. Apart from the fact than Rhodopis was probably a slave, there is no need for sanitation in this story.
Also, Disney have used the older Perrault version as a base instead of the Grimm one. In the Perault version, Cinderella forgive her stepsisters in the end. There was no need to sanitise anything.
- San Michele Arcangelo: sanctuary, 490 (St. Michael, supposedly did appear here)
- Taxiarchi Michail: monastery, 18th century (the younger one)
- Stella Maris: monastery, 1185 for the latin monastery (but in fact 15th century BCE as part of Mount Carmel)
So, none of them are a proper cathedrals but monasteries and sanctuaries. With San Michele Arcangelo & Mont Saint-Michel the only two important ones as pilgrimage destinations.
The "line" could easily be "broken", if we add for example, the Castel Sant'Angelo in Roma (Mausoleum of Hadrian) or Saint-Michel de Cuxà. Both are far more prestigious than... Skellig Michael than nobody would know about if if was not on this "line".
I perfectly understand why a contact form would reject a mail with the domain "example.com". This is obviously not a valid email domain (and may be the default domain used as greyed example in the contact form).
The contact form is linked in the article [1], and it rejects genuinely valid emails. You can try it yourself and see it doesn't have greyed examples, and that the problem is not example.com but the use of symbols. For example, greffe_acces@montréal.ca is a valid in-use email [2] that is rejected.
example.com was only used to take an example screenshot.
People can play with "small" or "medium" models less powerfull and cheaper cards. A Nvidia Geforce RTX 3060 card with "only" 12Gb VRAM can be found around €200-250 on second hand market (and they are around 300~350 new).
In my opinion, 48Gb of VRAM is overkill to call it "on a budget", for me this setup is nice but it's for semi-professional or professional usage.
There is of course a trade off to use medium or small models, but being "on a budget" is also to do trade off.