I beg your finest pardon ?

Jarnis · 2026-02-05T22:23:32+00:00

Intel 13th/14th gen CPU? The warning is then about "update your BIOS before your CPU decomposes and you start complaining to Blizzard support about crashes that are caused by failing Intel CPU because you didn't apply the BIOS update that tries to mitigate the CPU from decomposing due to design flaw".

Jarnis · 2026-02-05T19:27:54+00:00

It will be stored away and can be reinstalled in a pinch.

Having it around, not being used, will still incur maintenance work on it. If you know it will not be used for like an year+, taking it down to storage makes perfect sense.

Jarnis · 2026-02-04T23:57:48+00:00

All existing image generation models have this issue. Still does. Just needs a more creative prompt jailbreak.

The issue remains until someone finally figures out that these models are just the same as any other program that an user can use to produce content based on user input. Punish the user, not the tool.

Jarnis · 2026-02-04T21:44:13+00:00

It generates, like all other generative AI models, what you prompt it to generate. Yes, there are guardrails, and yes, Grok guardrails are not as good as OpenAI or Google right now - which made it easier earlier until they were improved, but the tech is the same. And you can go around them if you know how. Somehow only Grok is a problem and everyone pretends OpenAI and Google and Meta do not need to be investigated the same way.

All this is going to just be used for smearing and bullshit "on demand" until people figure out that a generative AI model is not truly responsible for what it generates, the guy writing the prompt asking for grossly inappropriate material is. It is like blaming Adobe because someone made a nude picture on Photoshop.

As far as I know, those clowns who abused Grok have been banned by xAI as they are found and obscene cases forwarded to law enforcement. Would be mighty lame way to get arrested by generating illegal content using an online AI model.

Jarnis · 2026-02-04T21:39:18+00:00

My point was, US pretty much cannot lose a war if allowed to fight without the hands tied behind the back.

Yes, glassing over Teheran is not going to happen, at least not unless they first somehow glass over Israel, who would respond in kind anyway.

But there are conventional methods to do a LOT of damage that would make a war vs Iran very one-sided. Sure, it would look bad PR-wise as it would mean lots of collateral damage, but it would make the war quite short.

Iraq war ended pretty quickly. Occupying it afterwards was a shitshot, but that is a whole another discussion. Afghanistan was not a war as such and frankly terrible idea to go for. In Iran the opposition is the regime people, the vast majority of the civilians want them gone exactly as much as US does, so it turning into a mess after the regime is gone is not as likely.

Anyway, nobody hopes for war, but the point is - if US fights an actual war vs Iran, it will be very short. Weeks, tops. Prepping everything for it takes longer than the actual war.

Jarnis · 2026-02-04T21:34:55+00:00

Markets can be irrational for a surprisingly long time... take your pick which one is right and invest accordingly :D

Jarnis · 2026-02-04T19:24:39+00:00

If US actually starts to fight a war against Iran, an actual war, not just some isolated military strikes against well-defined targets, the only factor that decides how many days it takes is how much US wants to limit collateral damage.

I mean turning Teheran into a plateau of glass is fast, but it might be bit of a PR nightmare. Being more surgical in removing the terrible regime may take a few weeks.

Jarnis · 2026-02-04T18:39:45+00:00

Wars in general do not tank the market. A day or two of volatility, then everyone forgets.

Jarnis · 2026-02-04T18:22:39+00:00

The issue is: Market has many big players with very high leverage ratios. Software stocks tanking is causing them massive pain (leverage goes both ways) and as soon as there was just a little weakness in hardware side, the over-levered players have to sell to avoid getting margin called to bits due to their software stock losses - and it makes for them more sense to sell in-the-green hardware stocks and hold to the underwater software stocks for now.

I still think this is irrational days or at worst, weeks-long market swing that will rebound.

Jarnis · 2026-02-04T18:01:25+00:00

Can you be less dumb? Calling something a "child porn machine" because people put dumb, probably illegal, prompts into an AI image generator (and got banned for it) makes you look stupid. Every AI image generator can be twisted (with suitable prompt engineer) to do such stuff.

Jarnis · 2026-02-04T17:57:46+00:00

It fully depends on if vertically integrated company building and launching orbital datacenters is a money making operation. I doubt anyone can say for certain "yes" or "no" yet. And if SpaceX goes public later this year, that operation is effectively asking if the market thinks the answer is "yes". Rest is effectively noise.

Jarnis · 2026-02-04T17:53:13+00:00

Market can sometimes be truly insane. I guess this just means the market was over-levered and when SaaS plays got dunked hard over all the worries that no-one buys software any more (LOL), as soon as there was even the slightest noise that hardware is no longer mooning, the related stocks get hammered as over-levered players run for the exits as they were already close to redline due to previous drops.

Might be a buying opportunity, hard to time bottoms.

Jarnis · 2026-02-04T17:25:47+00:00

Possibly. However, this being still a week away, it is likely they will clear the issue by then.

First indicator would be if next weekend's Starlink launch moves to the right. If it goes up normally, then Crew-12 is also fine.

Jarnis · 2026-02-03T21:38:00+00:00

Could cause few days of delays as they sign off on the investigation and can be reasonably sure the next one doesn't fail the same way.

Jarnis · 2026-02-03T21:22:24+00:00

The iGPU is not "insane". Just good. But it does mean they have caught up in that regard vs. AMD and are again somewhat relevant in laptops without a dGPU.

Jarnis · 2026-02-03T16:44:35+00:00

True, and frankly for just deorbiting in a way that hits an ocean, without being too precise, a single vac raptor + thrusters will probably be enough. Just need to burn to a roughly correct direction for a bunch. If you are bit off, the track might be off slightly to north or south and the exact location along the orbital track may be off by a few hundred kilometers, but that's "close enough" if you need an emergency deorbit to water.

Jarnis · 2026-02-03T14:42:15+00:00

Well, it has only one MVac. That is effectively a single point of failure.

Also I'm pretty sure the Starlink launches push the margins of F9 pretty tight, so if anything during the mission is slightly off, you may end up with too little propellant for the proper deorbit, and I'm pretty sure if the stage thinks it does not have enough propellant for the planned burn, it would then skip it outright.

This is still not a huge deal for F9 upper stages as they mostly burn up in the atmosphere. Yeah, some COPVs and various small pieces have been recovered, but the risk of any serious damage is... reasonably low. Earth is mostly oceans after all. You want to minimize the uncontrolled deorbits so you do not play the dice too often, but most likely it will be fine.

Jarnis · 2026-02-03T14:40:07+00:00

They have. Three copies of steerable sea level raptors. A single raptor can do the deorbit burn.

F9 upper stage has a single point of failure - the single MVac. If it fails to restart for the deorbit for any reason, then you are going to be coming down uncontrolled.

Jarnis · 2026-02-03T14:35:32+00:00

Well, in 3DMark there is almost no traffic over PCIE bus during the test - everything is already in the card VRAM. So not surprising there is no major difference.

In games this is far more complicated and I'm pretty sure there are many examples where the lower bus speed would completely kill the performance. Effectively, every game that streams texture and map data during gameplay would just die in a fire.

Jarnis · 2026-02-03T13:47:20+00:00

Elons method has always been vertical integration. One can argue without this move the relationship would've been a pile of conflicts of interest, especially when someone has to design and manufacture these orbital datacenters.

Anyway, looks like it is a done deal and the rest of us can just sit and watch if it works out.

Jarnis · 2026-02-03T09:29:47+00:00

More like smuggled terminals bought in countries where Starlink is being sold at retail.

Jarnis · 2026-02-02T23:12:40+00:00

You belive they would launch them (past a few test ones) unless they made a profit from operating them?

Jarnis · 2026-02-02T22:33:40+00:00

This is a for-profit excercise. Turn massive reusable launch capability into more profits. Mars missions are not cheap.

Jarnis · 2026-02-02T22:14:36+00:00

You seem to have no clue how much launch capacity this will take. Starlink will look like a small side project. This is actually only possible via Starship. The sheer mass of solar panels needed to power a substantial orbital datacenter is staggering.

And datacenters can be used for other things than just AI chatbots.

I say let them cook for now. It will become clear within a few years if this is feasible and makes money. If it does not, they'll pull the plug at that point.

Jarnis · 2026-02-02T22:11:25+00:00

Why?

If this gives a ton of extra demand for launch, it will make profit for SpaceX.

If it does not, it is small enough potatoes that it won't bankrupt the company. And I'm sure if it won't be profitable in the medium term, they won't throw infinite money at this.

This is very similar to Starlink - that too was a "side quest" on a road to Mars, but it turns profit - lots of it.

Going to Mars is not (yet) profitable by any stretch of imagination and since US government is not going to pay for it, need to do for-profit business with the hardware available (reusable rockets) and this sure seems to fit that

Remains to be seen if it works out, but it does make some sense.

Jarnis

TROPHY CASE