Good. Never been able to make mypy work as intended.

Thanks for high effort reply.

The Chinese companies probably use SIMC over TSMC from now on. They were able to do low volume 7 nm last year. Also, Nvidia and “China” are not on the same spot on the tech s-curve. It will be much cheaper for China (and Intel/AMD) to catch up, than it will be for Nvidia to maintain the lead. Technological leaps and reverse engineering vs dimishing returns.

Also, expect that the Chinese government throws insane amounts of capital at this sector right now. So unless Stargate becomes a thing (though I believe the Chinese invest much much more), there will not be fair competition (as if that has ever been a thing anywhere anytime). China also have many more tools, like optional command economy. The US has nothing but printing money and manipulating oligarchs on a broken market.

I’m not sure about 80/10 exactly of course, but it is in that order of magnitude, if you’re willing to not run newest fancy stuff. I believe the MI300X goes for approx 1/2 of the H100 nowadays and is MUCH better on paper. We don’t know the real performance because of NDA (I believe). It used to be 1/4. If you look at VRAM per $, the ratio is about 1/10 for the 1/4 case. 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.

So, my bet is max 2 years for “China”. At least when it comes to high-end performance per dollar. Max 1 year for AMD and Intel (if Intel survive).

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.

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.

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. I mean, it hasn’t been true for a really long time. Google, Meta and Amazon already make their own chips. That’s probably true for DeepSeek as well.

I really don’t believe the technological lead is massive.

The thing is that they can no longer sell insanely overpriced hardware. The VC fucktards and coin bros begin to understand they’re being scamed. And that murdering competition from China is around the corner. All this is very good news for consumers.

Nice. Fuck you Nvidia.

It will probably not reduce demand. But it will for sure make it impossible to sell insanely overpriced hardware. Now I’m looking forward to buying a PC with a Chinese open source RISCV CPU and GPU. Bye bye Intel, AMD, ARM and Nvidia.

Better federation and search. Make it easier for content creators and instance runners to monetize. Make it easier to script your own feed/recommendations.

All of the above is true for all software on the fediverse. But monetization especially for PeerTube. Pay to watch, donations and ads should all be options in the official implementation. Because of the high cost of running a large high bandwidth instance (if that wasn’t obvious).

Seems like the only ones who really benefit from PeerTube right now are right-wing extremists. The only large Swedish instances are far-right. And they are big because of content supply and demand.

deleted by creator

So I was correct. Thanks!

That’s great!

Yeah, maybe that was a bad example. I believe my point is that if the quality of the product and/or the number of users is large enough, it doesn’t matter if you don’t have a viable business plan yet.

The big risk when it comes to the fediverse is that it still is so small that big tech could just highjack the whole thing, and it wouldn’t even be a bullet on the weekly board agenda. I.e. it’s still pocket money we’re taking about.

Exactly. And there are countless of popular open source projects which are funded by VC. Many of which I have no idea how they plan to make money. Astral (the creator of ruff and uv) is one recent example.

Just say that you use Rust and AI, and the VC will come.

Instead of writing the same answer to all sceptics, I’ll just write one answer here:

I believe that you greatly overestimate the rationality of VC at a micro level and greatly underestimate the number of business cases that can be made on top of popular open standards. Developing a fediverse software like Pixelfed is basically free if you’re with the big money. The question is if it will hurt your other investments and strategy. Right now it looks like the answer is “no”. The risk of putting too many eggs in the oligarch basket seems quite high.

Is it not possible to make money of the internet because you don’t own the infrastructure and the standards are open?

How can you make money of the internet if you don’t own all infrastructure and control all standards? I promise, there are countless businesses cases.

No official Android and iPhone apps => no users.

Facebook has always been removing posts and comments containing links to Fediverse. At least they did a couple of years ago. But it doesn’t happen all the time, so there is some kind decision making algorithm.

Didn’t get banned, but they marked the post as spam. That was 3 days ago. Maybe they’re blocking now as well.

They should’ve done that years ago. Twitter was a shit show long before Elon took over. And there are barely any normies on X. So public official presence isn’t necessary. Neither from a democratic nor an election winning viewpoint.

I was just about to ask something similar. Controversial sorting within a community is clearly broken in its current state. You’ll only see ancient posts unless the community is tiny.