• 124 Posts
  • 1.25K Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 9th, 2023

help-circle




  • "Dystopian" as a concept can mean many things. One person's individual dystopia may be within a utopia.

    Generally, I consider something to be dystopian if it is making negative assumptions about the future that are rooted in speculative fiction. These are more like science fiction, fantasy, or geopolitical.

    I consider something utopian when it is unrealistic and glossing over aspects that are impossible or poorly premised while presenting them as positive.

    An example of dystopian would be the Terminator films or most films and books about AI. These fall into a trope of the machine gods. These are no more than a retelling of a pantheon like mythos of supernatural gods. The issues of future AI are unrelated to this mythos. They are also based on the fallacy of dominance caused extinction. By this logic Earth is a monoculture. These conceptual abstractions are dystopian because they are making stupid handwaving assumptions that result in a dark and grim setting.

    Depicting the messiness of reality does not mean a fictional story is either dystopian or utopian.

    An example of a utopia is something like a biblical paradise. It is premised on brutal authoritarianism that lacks any objective nuances about the true diversity of life and opinions. It is glossing over the real differences in what people want and expect out of life in an idealized story arc that harms a lot of people. When these people are sidelined as irrelevant, the true underlying dystopian reality comes into view. Utopia is always a story of propaganda-like perfection masking a terror that lies beneath.

    One can paint such abstractions on almost any story. These are not really genera even if someone calls them such.

    You mentioned your story involves massive geopolitical upheaval. This concept could be painted as dystopian depending on how you write it. Throughout history there were many underlying reasons for changes. Like in the era of Alexander the Great, the conquests of the Macedonians in that age were more due to advances in equipment and a professionally trained army in an era that primarily consisted of less formal city states and small raiding parties. The era of the Romans was mostly the beginnings of broader social cohesion and coalitions of regions. The Great War and WW2 was the era of solidifying global boarders and the role of imperialism. If you are proposing a new era of evolving change, the reason for that change and why that change is a form of evolving progress in a geopolitical sense is important if you would like to abstract a label of utopian or dystopian. Otherwise it sounds like “war fiction” IMO.


  • It really isn’t that much IMO. You’ll get used to blocking more. Don’t keep scrolling and just block what you don’t want while being respectful of others that do like it. I have somewhere around 300 blocked communities in nearly 2 years all for various reasons. This ain’t reddit. No one is manipulating you for retention, but no one is tailoring and babying you either. It takes a little effort to prune the list. Most if not all of this is on reddit too, but you were less targeted by it there, assuming that is where you come from. It took me awhile to adjust to this mentality. Now I am not bothered at all by simply blocking each community. There are not more than a dozen or so people regularly posting anime stuff that I can see from my account on LW.


  • You can, but I’ll caution you against doing so if at all possible. Try to find an existing smaller space to post within. Lemmy is not reddit in size. There is a very different potential for ultra niche communities here. Giving up on reddit is hard in that you likely have an emotional addiction on some abstract level. This is just like a breakup in that adjustment takes time. If you try to shape a new partner into the form of your last, things tend to end badly.

    Most new niche communities here are more like blogs. It is a major uphill battle to create something that is self sustained and has others posting regularly. Unless you are very skilled at driving popularity, you will likely struggle.

    However, you will likely find acceptance in a more general space. It is far better to start in a more general space and if you find the comradery, or your regular collective dominance with others becomes an issue, then branch from that base and start a new community.

    I’m a nobody and no authority here. You do you. This is just what I have observed as successful versus the many that are not in the last 2 years.








  • I blocked NSQ bc of an active bot as a mod.

    Lemmy in general does not handle conceptual abstractions well at all. I think it is great to question the seemingly obvious subjects, and to poll user depth and intelligence regularly. I hate getting blindsided by someone asking stupid questions like this in real life and having to take the time to think out which of many angles I would like to address the issue from. I find it useful and healthy to see how others address such a question and how people respond to the various approaches. This is fundamental to the intuitive usefulness of NSQ and when that utility is hampered it effectively renders the community useless.

    I rather ineffectively volunteered to take over the community myself when I encountered poor moderation from a bot with no accountable individual to address. Instead I block the community and consider it an embarrassment to exist.





  • The USA had trouble with fabs and the supporting infrastructure safety needed to transport the extremely hazardous chemicals. It happened to be convenient to outsource the fabs. It is all primarily funded by US based venture capital. These are not the nations in control of these assets like some kind of independent thing. If you look at how the transfers happened, it was all essentially done so that the US stays in control.

    I spent a few months going down the rabbit hole of the computer history YT channel’s verbal history interviews. I’m aware that those likely had quite the American bias and all, but in aggregate there are a lot of stories describing how this played out from the people that were involved. There were also several interviews I watched that go into various military aspects that are quite interesting. It has been around 8 years since I went down that rabbit hole. So my memory is tinted. I’m good at remembering my abstracted simplifications but not the specific details.

    My total understanding of hardware is kinda frozen around some parts of an ISA. Like I built Ben Eater’s bread board computer, but I struggle between pipelines and out of order instructions, branching in FORTH/assembly, and wtf is going on with C, up until I get to Python which I can read and bash scripts like I prefer. I’m not quite as naive as I like to play, but pretty damn close.

    I figure RISC-V will still play the baseline in the future. If new nodes are not possible, the present model of royalties will not hold up. Standardization will be good for everyone. The last time I watched a RISC-V conference was probably around 2021, but it looked really solid then. Most of the old guard like Intel were major financial contributors to RISC-V at that time.


  • Not really. Reverse engineering has traditionally had limited value because of the exponential growth of silicon and the time it takes to develop anything on a node.

    It is impossible to understate how insane CPU speeds are at the present. These are high speeds even for radio frequencies. Traces are no longer required to be connected at these speeds. Capacitive coupling becomes a major aspect of signal transmission; the entire RLC gamut is impactful. Anyone can, and likely every major player does, reverse engineer every major hardware design they can acquire. This will only allow one to understand what is now irrelevant in terms of design. The new chip in question will already be well into the process of amelioration of development costs.

    You see, the reason the chip costs so much initially is because of the cost of the node and all of the hardware involved in creating the chip. The tooling costs are immense now. The reason the price of hardware drops over time is because actually producing the chips is dirt cheap by comparison. The initial cost is a projection about how much time it will take to pay back the initial investment assuming the units sell in low volume. As that volume increases and the loans are paid back, the price is dropped to access more segments of the market at lower price points. There is a market saturation balance that must be maintained to keep the next generation viable. Each new product takes 10 years to create. This means a company like Nvidia has that (IIRC (prob not)) has something like an 18 month new major product release schedule Will have the next 6 generations of products already in various phases of planning and design. If you reverse engineer a publicly available product, you are largely reverse engineering the fab’s capabilities while also looking at a product that is 6 generations behind the real cutting edge. Not to mention, you are also never going to be successful releasing your reverse engineered product because you cannot sell it at a competitive initial price required to pay for the required tooling when the original product has already done so and can be sold for cost of manufacture with a small markup.

    The enormous difference between the cost of tooling and cost of actually making the chip is absolutely essential to understand in combination with exponential growth. This is what William Shockley realized in the 1950’s and convinced the US government to pursue. The entire modern world we all have known is due to this exponential growth. This growth is absolutely remarkable in human history as the only time a civilian business endeavor has out classed the economic growth created by the largest militaries of the world. This is what Shockley actually realized; that the military budget could not match the growth potential of silicon up to the plateau of potential scaling when physics prevents further scaled nodes. There are only a few new nodes left, and those are the next 10 years. This means we are already at the end of scaling because hardware designers are actually already there. The concept of Venture Capital is actually a pseudo extension of military budgeting constraints in a round about way. Indeed, Silicon Valley is where the real battle of the cold war happened. The Soviet Union and China failed to realize how silicon scaling would alter and become a decisive military operation. Once that ball started rolling, it is impossible to catch the front line so long as the design edge is kept a closely guarded secret and the extreme capital required is too high to be viable.

    This is the real reason why your mobile devices are all running orphaned kernels on undocumented hardware. Your need to buy new devices when you are told is the primary factor driving these new nodes. You are less likely to realize that this is ultimately a tax to avoid large scale wars and major conflicts. This is why the changes happening right now in politics are not trivial. Moves are being made that appear similar to the era before venture capital and the Pax-Silicon™. We are already at the end of silicon exponential growth. There is no replacement for the exponential growth of silicon to outstrip military based spending and growth as has been the standard for all of the rest of human history. This will inevitably lead to hording scarcity and conflicts. The enormity of funding will cause the use of militaries to press advantages before they disappear. These are the factors that created world wars of the past and they will arise again. The next era of technology is going to be biology, but we are at least a couple of centuries away from biology as an engineering science where something like a synthetic brain is capable of producing a Turing complete deterministic computer on par with a CPU of the present. There is no clear path to exponential growth either like there was with scaling silicon. Perhaps the software organization, libraries, and database scaling will be an exponential growth factor, but I don’t know how that will have a barrier of entry on par with silicon in a way that is insurmountable by everyone including large governments and coalitions of governments.

    So this is the world that is changing around the issue of RISC-V. It will come into its own in a post VC growth era. We are at the end of that growth already. Reverse engineering becomes relevant now and proprietary secretive strategy is no longer of the same magnitude of military significance. My narrative here will become more and more obvious with time. This has been a years long curiosity between many of my interests like why the world prior the the 1950’s was so different, why the USA won the cold war, and understanding the history of the microprocessor to wrap my head around all the peripherals present in an Arduino which was born out of a desire to learn Megasquirt when I was a hotrod car nut ages ago. I abstract across broad spaces well like this and like to simplify complexity because I’m dumb like that.

    Things like patents are just weapons of the super rich. They have no real relevance here. The outcome of these cases has nothing to do with justice or right and wrong. These are battlefronts of militaries with convoluted rules of engagement. In the next 10 years this proxy conflict space will be abandoned and everything changes into an unknown state. Likely new silicon will become far too expensive to create and incremental nonsense will give way to more nuanced innovations. There will also be a lot of very expensive products for the super rich and only scraps for the plebs as there is no reason to scale pricing over time instead of branding perception based marketing of exclusivity for the elite.



  • Open AI is showing holes in the armor already. Open source always wins in the long term. There are many attempts to limit RISC-V adoption but if you look, even the old guard is putting chips on this board.

    Having half a data center on a different architecture and load is untenable. Nvidia got lucky and is in a good position but that will only last 6-8 years at most. It is likely far less when China takes Taiwan and NK attacks SK at the same time. Nvidia has nothing without TSMC in Taiwan. That will leave only Intel and they are a train wreck that is relying on TSMC too. All of the Chip-Act fabs are trailing edge by the time they come online so those won’t save Nvidia either. This is what the US voted for; massive taxifs and WW3 by 2030.

    It will end up just like with AI in China. They are more agile and capable than the West imagines. They will pivot the chip limitations into the future. All of the American hegemony is based on layers upon layers of anticompetitive stagnation. Once those walls come down the future will move more quickly. All of these US companies are traitors as far as I am concerned. They outsourced at the expense of their neighbors and country. There are hundreds of thousands of homeless people in the USA. We have neo feudalism largely thanks to these shit companies. I hope they all crash and burn and will gladly buy Chinese.

    Also, with the current posturing of the USA towards Europe, EUV may become much more available in China. The Chinese look a whole lot less like stupid fascist Nazis than the US does now. We are the ones creating massive human rights violations and burning down the world in rancid stupidity. There is no moral ground to stand on do don’t expect ASML and the Dutch to feel all warm and fuzzy about US loyalties.