I bought mine with cameras and a radar, which they then deprecated and left an unused. Even though autopilot was better when it had radar. Then I realized that this thing would never be self-driving and that its CEO was throwing nazi salutes. Cut my losses and got rid of it. Gotta admit defeat sometimes.
Don't underestimate just how much money you can make off funneling visitors to ads at scale. It's basically Google's entire business model.
If OpenAI plays their cards right, they can definitely end up in a similar position. Yeah a lot of programmers would probably pony up for Claude, but every lazy high schooler in the world would gladly hear about Raid: Shadow Legends to have ChatGPT do their homework for them.
Don't get me wrong it's definitely sucks, but man is it ever a profitable way to suck.
This assumes that ads at google's or facebook's level would get them anywhere close to profitability. OpenAI's costs of doing business are only accelerating, all while burn rate continues to get worse. I have no doubt that selling ads will bring in a lot of revenue, but it'll be dwarfed by the numbers OpenAI needs to stop hemorrhaging cash every quarter. The great irony is that the more success OpenAI has in gaining users, the more money they lose at an ever-increasing rate. Lose on every sale, and make up for it in volume!
Seeing all these articles and studies touting GLP-1s as a magic additive to enhance health and well-being has me so skeptical that there haven't been any major downsides found yet. I guess long-term studies are necessary in order to really understand what we're getting on here.
I would love for it to be miracle it appears to be, since I hate trying to maintain my desired weight. I don't qualify for GLP-1 due to my BMI being too low, but I sure would like to stop the constant cravings for food and my love of beer. Everyday feels like a struggle to maintain a healthy lifestyle.
GLP-1s are the greatest medical innovation of the past decade. Top three, at least, mRNA might give them a run for their money.
There are known side effects, mostly gastrointestinal issues, and they don't work for everyone. That being said, I'd recommend you make your own risk assessment and consider getting on GLP-1s if you have the cash to spare. You might find that GLP-1s increase your quality of life so much that it's well-worth it (or that you get terrible nausea and immediately quit, and then you no longer need to wonder).
Potential risks have to be weighed against potential benefits. There are robust RCT results showing GLP-1s reduce all-cause mortality, major cardiovascular events, and stroke among patients with obesity or T2D by 13-14%, and suggestive evidence that some of these benefits apply to non-overweight people, though this hasn't been confirmed in RCTs and is likely smaller in magnitude.
"Cardiovascular and renal outcomes of glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists among patients with and without type 2 diabetes mellitus: A meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials": https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S266666772...
One reason to believe that cardiovascular benefits might apply to non-overweight people is that among the available evidence on overweight and obese people, weight loss doesn't seem to explain all benefits. See Figure 1 or the analysis section of the SELECT trial.
The main plausible long-term risk is thyroid cancer. Data from a meta-analysis of RCTs suggests a 55% (large error bars) increase in thyroid cancer risk.
This is concerning, though it's worth noting that thyroid cancer is rare (1% lifetime incidence) and unlikely to kill you (98% 5-year survival, 99.9% when caught early). No studies have linked GLP-1s to a statistically significant increase in cancer-related mortality. I don't want to be too confident because RCTs have not yet shown this and I'm not an Eli Lilly shill, but cohort studies suggest GLP-1s are associated with reduced risk of other cancers. This is a good overview:
Thanks for the thorough answer. I'm going to ask my GP and oncologist about the possibility of going on it just to see what it's like. I sure would like to drop 10 pounds and want less beer.
Sure, but in an MCP server the endpoints provide a description of how to use the resource. I guess a text file is nice too but it seems like a stepping stone to what will eventually be necessary.
There's an epic conflict of interest here with Musk owning most of both companies. And they're in entirely separate fields, there is no plausible synergy here to be gained.
How can you have a conflict of interest if they're entirely separate fields? They have different interests, so where's the conflict?
You don't need synergies to justify a merger. They're often used as justification as in paying well above market price. But it has nothing to do with actual justification. You can just have a holding company of businesses
Yeah but who can be hurt by this, these are both private companies? So whose interest is his "conflicting" with? I'm sure the shareholders will raise it with him and/or bring a lawsuit if they aren't happy (they probably are happy).
Yeah, I'm not buying that. I don't see how that could be any cheaper than regular datacenters. It might just be technically feasible, but launching stuff into space will always be more expensive than not launching stuff into space. And all those pesky technical issues like cooling might be solvable, but I doubt they're that cheap to solve.
No he is not. It makes no sense from a physics standpoint or an economic standpoint. And even if they were, it wouldn’t require whatever this acquisition is.
Musk has a history of having one of his more successful companies buying one of his less successful companies. xAI bought X, and Tesla bought SolarCity
Musk is notorious for shuffling assets across his companies to make some financials look better. For example, shuffling Twitter servers (and then all of Twitter) under xAI.
my partner got shingles a couple years ago, it was a very painful experience!
(to be crystal clear, I am making a joke equating the failed SolarCity/Tesla solar shingles to the (generally considered very painful) Herpes Zoster manifestation also called "shingles")
What's funny? Do you think the investors are against this? The investor's aren't idiots. I imagine the typical investor in Elon Musk's companies would approve of this sort of thing. So what's the problem? Besides, its a private company with Musk as majority shareholder in both. That's the beauty of private companies, you can just do things.
I wish more companies were private and ambitious. I'm tired of companies like Apple making marginal spec bumps to their phones and milking the same products for decades
More than 70% of voting shares supported the package, very close to the level of support in the original 2018 vote. This excludes Musks share.
And consider that this is retroactive, meaning it's backpay. They're literally voting to give the guy $50b for work performed. He has a lot of confidence from his investors. And if there were issues, there would be lawsuits. Ironically the only lawsuits that get brought up, like the one about the pay package, are basically trolls, from a guy that had 9 shares.
Besides the parent is the one making a claim that something not above board is going on so burden of proof is on him.
Finally, it's a private company where Musk is the majority shareholder. He's moving money from one pocket into another, and any moves will be reflected in his attempt to raise money with the IPO coming this year.
I can't imagine the world view you would have to hold to think that people who manage to command tens of billions of dollars to invest are idiots, just tripped over the money and just go off vibes.
The investors want to cash out, Musk needs lots of money to plow into his latest toy that so far only excels in ridiculing him and sexual harassment/CSAM, so they make a deal to take in xAI and go public. Win win.
It's widely reported that Musk is a majority shareholder of xAI and the controlling shareholder of SpaceX (close to 80% of voting shares). Not surprising that he would be looking to consolidate ownership under one entity especially if he perceives significant synergies (i.e., data centres in space).
Shocked to see SpaceX buy the datacenter in space meme. Where does the power come from? Where does the heat go? Why add (high) launch costs to your buildout capex? Why add radiation as another risk factor to your already-unreliable GPUs? Am I missing something fundamental here...?
Money! Also power source is just solar - not too difficult. I don't think radiation would be too much of an issue either since they're in low earth orbit. Heat is probably the biggest problem. Or manufacturing & launch costs. Pretty silly idea anyway.
Aside from Elon Musk, there are a few other people with a lot of capital aiming to do the same thing. That means, either they are all wrong (possible) or this problem has been solved somehow and the solution itself is not public.
Google and Amazon are doing the same thing. Maybe it is a moonshot (pun intended), but Musk is hardly alone in the push.
Not to mention the huge issues of cosmic rays. Sure, if the lifespan of the satellite is expected to be low, then maybe tolerable. But even then, how would this be financially viable?
I think it's far more likely that he wants to combine his businesses to roll his really expensive, debt-ridden companies into one entity with the company that actually reliably makes money.
Indeed. But it's also a hilariously Musky idea! Some moderate technical competence paired with sociopathy and an ego orders of magnitude too big, and voila, you get Cybertrucks, Hyperloops, Neuralinks, Teslabots, datacenters in space, and all the other garbage the man spews.
I cannot wait for him to one day be hit in the face by reality.
I have never understood how Data centers in space ever make economic sense, the payload, latency and many other issues make it difficult at least for the immediate needs
DCs in space have a lot of problems, but latency isn't really one of them. At least for inference*, I don't care if a chat response comes with a 0.2 second ping time (Earth-GEO-Earth at the speed of light), and I definitely don't care if a vibe coding session has a 2.5 second ping time (Earth-Moon-Earth).
I wonder what the largest viable ping time would be, for vibe coding? If it exceeds 40 minutes (my pre-Christmas experimentation would have been fine with that but it was just experiments), these things could be on Mars on the opposite side of the sun and still be useful.
* I have no idea what training needs, neither fundamentally nor currently in practice
given the max bandwidth of a starlink sat is in the 100Gb on a good day range why would you want to limit a DC to less bandwidth than a single cheap fibre?
Also in LEO you're going to have reentry become more of an issue (starlink burning up in the atmosphere isn't some free garbage removal it will have a measurable impact on the chemical make up (assuming it even burns up and doesn't just squash more farm buildings), Power supply more of an issue and still have huge problems with heat and radiation.
reply