Not slept on at all. It was absolute trash, and I’m super curious why people pretend otherwise. There isn’t a single thing that model did better than any temporal peer.
As an aside… the if there was a real system out there that was trustworthy, it would have all of this and it would be the evidence you actually need to trust it.
If someone had a secure system for some of the worst stuff out there and it lasted more than a minute, pay attention because they might have actually solved some real problems.
The embarrassing part is that it might be working.
I was at my in laws… these people have a landline they can’t imagine getting rid of, an emergency only cell flip phone, don’t own a microwave…
And they’re asking me if I heard about “OpenAI’s rouge agents hacking huggingface”.
This is not a joke. They said huggingface. I was surrounded by four walls in which I never would have bet someone else’s money that I’d ever hear the two words put together in that order.
It’s a formalized propaganda campaign. Watch, it’s about to split on hard political lines too, Obama is out there with a suspiciously “for the children” AI regulation push for midterms.
I have an application on an SPC58 that I really want to know more about. But unfortunately; it’s a dual core with lockstep. So if it could be done; I think that automatically double-pluses the budget.
Don’t need lasers for that chip, it absolutely can be done with enough time and effort.
Don’t let fancy language like lock-step dissuade you from trying. The people who configured that chip also have to have done their job perfectly or it might still have a way in!
There’s been a lot of time and effort and money put in to siloing away independent forums so that you don’t use them.
Someone go ahead and explain to me the actual rationale that RDDT has a higher P/E ratio than Nvidia. It’s not because of some dumb “ai training deal”. It’s because until they run it into the ground, it is the place to find what used to exist in forums.
> Someone go ahead and explain to me the actual rationale that RDDT has a higher P/E ratio than Nvidia.
Investors in RDDT are pricing more growth than they are into NVDA. NVDA had a high P/E until their net income grew ($4B and change to $72.2B in from FY 2023 to FY 2025 and over $100B for FY 2026)
Pretending that any of this is some traditional idea of investor sentiment is such a last decade way line of argument. Please don’t insult us both pretending real people and their motivations are what drive the markets.
Some of it is due to the explosion in options trading and the resultant hedging by market makers, but large institutions still have valuation models based on fundamentals that they trade on.
It’s entirely possible that the market is wrong about RDDTs future growth, and in that case the P/E will come back down to earth.
Not slept on at all. It was absolute trash, and I’m super curious why people pretend otherwise. There isn’t a single thing that model did better than any temporal peer.
reply