cybersandwich

GPU with a ton of vran is what you need, BUT

An alternate solution is something like a Mac mini with an m series chip and 16gb of unified memory. The neural cores on apple silicon are actually pretty impressive and since they use unified memory the models would have access to whatever the system has.

I only mention it because a Mac mini might be cheaper than GPU with tons of vram by a couple hundred bucks.

And it will sip power comparatively.

4090 with 24gb of vram is $1900 M2 Mac mini with 24gb is $1000

Like he was saying, it's more than just power loss. It's a way of "sanitizing" the power as it comes in. This is "usually" not a problem. But dirty power is arguably worse than power outages. If the voltages fluctuate or get low for whatever reason that puts a big strain on your power supplies.

This could happen because you run a vacuum on the same circuit and your house is old, guy down the street electrocutes himself or the power coming in from the electric company is 'dirty' because they have an issue with transformers or up stream somewhere. It can be imperceptible to you, but your tech notices.

Such negative posts about this.

If you don't want it, don't buy it. It's not pay to play. You can play the game just fine without spending a dime.

Oh and by the way, the reason you can play without spending a dime is because they monetize on people who are willing to spend money on it.

Again, if you want to spend money you can. If you don't want to spend money, don't.

I felt like I must have misread the ruling after seeing all of the articles and comments.

Former presidents also have a “presumption of immunity” for their official acts while in office — but, the court ruled, there is no immunity for “unofficial acts.”

So chutkin is going to decide what acts were official acts and which were unofficial.

But "presumption of immunity" is a weird fucking phrase too because it makes it seem like you can prove they aren't immune? Like presumption of innocence--you start there and work the other way. So presumably(pardon the pun) you can start there with this and work the other way still?

I'd need actual lawyers to make this make sense.

But either way it didn't seem as "carte Blanche presidents can do anything" to me when I read it.

Federal ethics guidelines are $20 of value and it can't be a cash equivalent (gift card).

These clowns are so out of touch.

My issue: my work cell phone's service seems to be disconnected.

Ticket system drop down for issue:

So uh...?? I guess I'll just fuck myself because any of these options is routing a ticket to the wrong group or making my problem much much worse when they misunderstand my issue because "why would it end up in my queue if I wasn't supposed to just give you an all new number and wipe your old phone remotely".

As I was reading the article it just kept getting worse and worse:

More than 60% of those surveyed said they posted fake jobs “to make employees believe their workload would be alleviated by new workers.”

Sixty-two percent of companies said another reason for the shady practice is to “have employees feel replaceable.”

Two-thirds of companies cited a desire to “appear the company is open to external talent” and 59% said it was an effort to “collect resumes and keep them on file for a later date.”

What’s even more concerning about the results: 85% of companies engaging in the practice said they interviewed candidates for the fake jobs.

Ummm

Interesting

The way I read all of this and th decision is that they are saying that this law specifically only applies to bribery. They define it as a quid quo pro in advance of an act.

In this particular case, you can't charge the guy with bribery because it doesn't meet the definition.

That doesn't mean a "tip after the fact" isn't corrupt. That doesn't mean that's not in violation of some other law. It's saying that you can't apply this law to this case. This court is threading a fucking needle in an attempt to make this a state issue and say the Fed law can't apply.

Justice Jackson's dissent is amazing though:

Snyder's absurd and atextual reading of the statute is one only today's Court could love."

The Court's reasoning elevates nonexistent federalism concerns over the plain text of this statute and is a quintessential example of the tail wagging the dog," Jackson added.

Officials who use their public positions for private gain threaten the integrity of our most important institutions. Greed makes governments—at every level—less responsive, less efficient, and less trustworthy from the perspective of the communities they serve,"

He didn't. He wanted freax or something dumb. Someone talked him into Linux.

I flew on a 737 max 8 today, so I basically know how these astronauts feel.

This comment chain made me chuckle. It's such an "internet comment section" ..trope? I don't know the right word.