Reading Marx is like unearthing the Necronomicon in a university library, a forbidden text that lays bare capitalism’s inner workings. But the true horror lies in realizing you’re surrounded by people who treat exploitation as ‘just how things work.’ Suddenly the world reveals itself as a self-sustaining asylum, where the so-called ‘rational’ diligently reproduce the madness of the system.
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆
- 1.63K Posts
- 2.41K Comments
Joined 5 years ago
Cake day: January 18th, 2020
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
2·1 day agoseems fine for me, here’s the content:
Mainland China is on track to surpass Taiwan in semiconductor foundry capacity by 2030, according to a report from Yole Group, underscoring Beijing’s progress in its push for chip self-sufficiency amid ongoing US tech restrictions. The mainland’s share of global foundry capacity is projected to reach 30 per cent by the end of the decade, up from 21 per cent in 2024, the French market research firm said. Taiwan is currently the market leader with a 23 per cent share last year, while mainland China is already ahead of South Korea at 19 per cent, Japan at 13 per cent and the US at 10 per cent. “Mainland China is rapidly becoming a central player,” Yole Group said, attributing the shift to Beijing’s intensified efforts to build a self-sufficient domestic semiconductor ecosystem since Washington launched a tech war that aimed to curb China’s progress in critical areas such as chips and artificial intelligence (AI). Beijing has doubled down on its “whole nation” approach to its self-sufficiency drive. The state-backed China Integrated Circuit Industry Investment Fund, known as the “Big Fund”, has successfully fostered the development of key companies such as Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation (SMIC) and Hua Hong Semiconductor, two of the country’s leading wafer foundries. Domestic fabs are set to play a bigger role over the next few years, according to the report, which said local chipmakers accounted for 15 per cent of foundry capacity in 2024. That share will be “significantly more” by 2030, the report said. Chinese chipmakers have been investing heavily in expanding their facilities to meet surging demand from sectors such as automotive and generative AI. China was expected to start three new fab construction projects this year, one-sixth of the world’s total, according to a report published in January by US-based industry association SEMI. China’s self-sufficiency strategy, along with expected demand from automotive and internet-of-things applications, would help boost capacity by 6 per cent for chips made with process nodes between 8 and 45 nanometres, SEMI added. Despite the projected gains, the mainland still trails Taiwan and South Korea in advanced process nodes, which are crucial for producing high-performance chips with greater transistor density. SMIC, China’s top foundry, had difficulty advancing its process nodes from 7-nm to 5-nm, Canadian research firm TechInsights said in a report last month. Two years after its 7-nm chip first appeared in a Huawei Technologies smartphone, “SMIC’s 5nm process node remains elusive,” TechInsights said. The report came after it looked into the chip used in Huawei’s new laptop with a foldable display, which also used 7-nm chips from SMIC. Meanwhile, global leaders Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) and Samsung Electronics are locked in a race to achieve mass production at the 2-nm node level. TSMC was expected to reach that level this year, while Samsung has reportedly planned to reach the same stage in early 2026.
2·1 day agoAlso notable how the Soviets were already doing the Virgin vs Chad Meme a hundred years ago
I think that’s exactly what’s gonna happen in the long run. Right now we’re in the hype phase of a new technology, but one the hype dies down we’ll start identifying use cases where the tech actually works well. At the same time the tech itself is going to mature, and people will figure out how to work with it effectively.
lol yeah it’s in the name
Yeah, like how do they not see this project as being strategic for them.
Which is the desirable outcome if the government represents the working class and exercises violence against attempts at a capitalist counterrevolution.
Right, and that’s why talk of authoritarianism is infantile. The question that’s actually important is whose interest the government represents.
I find what you generally want is a service bus. For example, if you have common tasks like sending emails, making PDFs, etc. you can create generic services that handle the action, and then call them providing the context such as the document the service should operate on. Meanwhile, actual business logic and the state should absolutely live in a single place.
Wait till you find out how modern economies function.
That’s one thing that’s stayed constant to this day.
should do an AMA on how long it took you
Have some humility and willingness to learn.
I have plenty of willingness to learn from people who have a clue on the subject.
I didn’t say it was the primary function.
You literally tried to argue that evolution doesn’t create complexity if there’s a more efficient path.th.
Then what about Darwin who literally said, “Natural selection is continually trying to economize every part of the organization.” Now please go and read some introductory texts on biology before trying to explain to me why Darwin is wrong. There’s so much going on when it comes to the thermodynamics of living systems and you’re clearly not ready to have a conversation about it.
Again, you’re showing a superficial understanding of the subject here. Natural selection selects for overall fitness, and efficiency is only a small part of equation. For example, plants don’t use the most efficient wavelength for producing energy, they use the one that’s most reliably available. Similarly, living organisms have all kinds of redundancies that allow them to continue to function when they’re damaged. Evolution optimizes for survival over efficiency.
You’re baseless assuming that hydrocephalus causes the brain to lose a substantial amount of its complexity.
Maybe read the actual paper linked there?
But hey neuroscience hasn’t really advanced at all since 1980 right? The brain is totally redundant right? There’s no possible way a critical and discerning person such as yourself could have been taken in by junk science, right?!!
What I linked you is a case study of an actual living person who was missing large parts of their brain and had a relatively normal life. But hey why focus on the actual facts when you can just write more word salad right?
I took issue with specific statements you made that stand apart from the rest of your comment.
You took issue with made up straw man arguments that you yourself made and have fuck all with what I actually said. Then you proceeded to demonstrate that you don’t actually understand the subject you’re debating. You might as well start believing in the astrology, crystals, and energy healing. At least those interests will make you seem fun and quirky instead of just a sad debate bro.
Im simply stating that you’re way off base when you claim that they appear to operate using the same principles or that all evidence suggests the human mind is nothing more than a probability machine.
I literally said these things, and you never gave any actual counter argument to either of them.
You’re betraying your own ignorance about neuroscience. The complexity of the brain is absolutely linked with its ability to reason and we have plenty of evidence to show that. The evolutionary process does not just create needless complexity if there is a more efficient path.
You’re betraying your ignorance of how biology works and illustrating that you have absolutely no business debating this subject. Efficiency is not the primary fitness function for evolution, it’s survivability. And that means having a lot of redundancy baked into the system. Here’s a concrete example for you of just how much of the brain isn’t actually essential for normal day to day function. https://www.rifters.com/crawl/?p=6116
This is such a silly statement especially when you’ve been claiming that both the brain and AI appear to work using the same principles.
There’s nothing silly in stating that the underlying principles are similar, but we don’t understand a lot of the mechanics of the brain. If you truly can’t understand such basic things there’s little point trying to have a meaningful discussion.
I don’t really care about your arguments concerning embodiment because they’re so beside the point when you just blowing right by the most basic principles of neuroscience.
That’s literally the whole context for this thread, it just doesn’t fit with the straw man you want to argue about.
A ruthless criticism of that exists includes the very researchers whose work you’re taking at face value.
Whose work am I taking at face value specifically? You’re just spewing nonsense here without engaging with anything I’m saying.
I suspect that something like LLMs is part of our toolkit, but I agree that this can’t be the whole picture. Ideas like neurosymbolic AI might be on the right track here. The idea here is to leverage LLMs at parsing and classifying noisy input data, which they’re good at, then use a symbolic logic engine to operate on the classified data. Something along these lines is much more likely to produce genuine intelligence. We’re still in very early stages of both understanding how the brain works and figuring out how to implement artificial reasoning.
LLMs and the human mind operate on categorically different principles.
A bold statement given that we don’t actually understand how the brain operates exactly and what algorithms that would translate into.
Where the straw man?
The straw man is you continuing to argue against equating LLMs with the functioning of the brain, something I never said here.
All the verbiage used to describe neural network models has little to do with how the brain actually works.
You appear to be conflating the implementation details of how the brain works with the what it’s doing in a semantic sense. There is zero evidence that all the complexity of the brain is inherent to the way our reasoning functions. Again, we don’t have a full understanding of how the brain accomplishes tasks like reasoning. It may be a lot more complex than what LLMs do, or it may not be. We do not know.
Finally, none of this has anything to do with the point I was actually making which is regarding embodiment. You decided to ignore that to focus on braying about tech companies and LLMs instead.
Oh yeah, once you start seeing it, you realize that we’re swimming in propaganda and people are simply regurgitating it uncritically like chatbots.