🇮🇱? /s

That name was given to me by my mother. Sadly she died before I was born. :(

"But what if I maybe need this one function in this one programme in the next 35 years?"

Technically, the LLM is right.

I think we need to differentiate between the potential of something versus the reality of something. We see people being super secretive of innovations right now and because they're patented they cannot even be reverse engineered. Innovations do die all of the time because the thing that is patented is a black box and even people who would reverse engineered it would get copyright trolled to hell.

My favourite example is spare parts for trains. Because the parts themselves are encumbered, it is illegal to repair trains yourself, thank you Siemens and Bombardier. Because if you get caught manufacturing spare parts, which are the intellectual property of someone else, you'll get into big trouble. How exactly does this behaviour help with innovation?

Another example are video codecs. AV1 was specifically engineered to avoid any sort of patent trolling. How much better would AV1 be if all of that engineering time could have been spent on innovation instead of trying to avoid encumbrance?

Also in your example, if there was a small invention and Walmart would just copy it, would the small inventor really have the resources to pursue Walmart in court for years on end? Best example is Amazon. They steal innovations all of the time and because they're doing it with small inventors, they face zero consequences because they do not have the resources to compete with a megacorporation.

But the biggest problem I have with patents is that it's not even internally consistent with capitalism. Example being, capitalism says competition is an objective good, while a monopoly is an objective bad. So why grant an unlimited monopoly for something if competition is good? Because if people were competing, then everyone would try to make the best version of something.

I mean, the theory may be pretty neat from some perspective, but the reality is we get the worst of both worlds. Innovations get killed off because everything is super proprietary and reverse engineering is prohibited and megacorporations can do whatever they want because, well, it's a free country. If you don't like it, just sue the megacorporation for years on end and just maybe get recourse for their transgression.

Corporations will do whatever is most profitable for them. If the strategy to patent something and then copyright troll the world to hell and back is the most efficient thing, that will be done. If the strategy to make the best product possible and get the most customers possible is the most efficient thing, that will be done instead. This would be internally consistent with the ideology of capitalism. " Why should the big government intervene with the free innovation of the free market? Let the invisible hand guide the innovation and may the best innovation win."

Edit: Also about trains. Train companies with the resources repair them all of the time, luckily. Because try to piss off someone who holds the power to just annihilate hundreds of millions worth in contracts overnight if they wanted.

It's wild to me that the only way to have a functioning computer nowadays is to exclusively use Libre software.

A computer, that fully saturates the CPU if you press the start menu button, is broken.

A computer, that refuses to start if the manufacturer doesn't want it to, is broken.

A computer, that is glued together, is broken.

A computer, that disables previous functionality and sells it back to you, is broken.

The world of Windows and macOS is wild. These are big things. How do people accept them?

People thought that Richard Stallman had a substance filled nightmare, but apparently it was precognition.

Haha! Funny meme, with no real world connection!

Reminder: Temporal, proprietary upscalers are only made mandatory by devs, that actively refuse to make a properly functioning product.

Guys, can we please call it LLM and not a vague advertising term that changes its meaning on a whim?

I don't get what the fuss is about, I would do it too. And you can always make more later. /s

ZFS: 🙂

Send this to Jensen every time he claims that frame generation is real performance.

Edit: typo