Womble

Users of consumer Windows are not Microsoft's customers in any real sense. Microsoft's customers are huge enterprises who want this stuff and smaller companies who are trapped into using the MS ecosystem by needing to have interoperability with other people/businesses who use MS products.

Its eco-friendly because the waste heat is being used to heat the home methane isnt being burnt to provide that heat. Data centres are needed unless you want to scrap the internet entirely.

I'm not an expert on licences by any means, but my understanding was that LGPL explicitly allows you to link it to other binaries with needing to licence them with the same licence. Does rust really only support static linking and not dynamic?

Per the Gnu wiki:

Does the LGPL have different requirements for statically vs dynamically linked modules with a covered work? (#LGPLStaticVsDynamic)

For the purpose of complying with the LGPL (any extant version: v2, v2.1 or v3):

   (1) If you statically link against an LGPLed library, you must also provide your application in an object (not necessarily source) format, so that a user has the opportunity to modify the library and relink the application.  

   (2) If you dynamically link against an LGPLed library already present on the user's computer, you need not convey the library's source. On the other hand, if you yourself convey the executable LGPLed library along with your application, whether linked with statically or dynamically, you must also convey the library's sources, in one of the ways for which the LGPL provides.  

So as long as you also provide your application with an LGPL library shaped hole you can release a static-linked binary with LGPL components.

Even then, LGPL exists, I wish more libraries would use it rather than going for MIT/BSD licences.

No, the body registers the buildup of CO2 as the trigger for the "oh shit I'm suffocating!" response. CO is such a dangerous gas, and you hear about people dying from it when things burn inefficiently, because it just makes you go dizzy and sleepy, then pass out and suffocate.

Its not a Microsoft thing, also I have no idea what you are agitated about, is there some sort of pop culture MCP that is terrible for it to be linked to? Searching for it the only thing other that Model context protocol I find is "make contribution payments", "Metcalfe Copeman & Pettefar LLP Solicitors" and "MCP fixings" so whatever it is, I imagine MS are unaware of it.

Thing is, thats fine if you're doing something like working on a version controlled codebase where you can just roll back whatever the agent does if you dont like it. The idea of using a windows computer that had an AI fucking around with system settings and registry entries gives me shivers. Thats before getting into the possibilities of hostile actors managing to prompt your AI to do something like give up sensitive information by getting it to read malicious information on a website.

Your point about poinitng (ha!) is incorrect, its pretty trivial to maintain pointing at the target. Hubble achived 7mas pointing accuracy over extended periods (thats ~0.000002degrees) with technology more than 30 years out of date. That gives you ~1.2m accuracy from geostationary orbit, which seems fine.

The real point is getting a mirror which is large enough and perfect enough into orbit is completely infeasible. As you rightly say, the maximum potential power it can provide is equal to solar insolation time its area.

Definitely a possibility! But dealing with "only being a normal profitable company" is a very different problem to "oops, we were selling $10 for $5 and VCs have stopped giving us money to burn, and people are using self hosted models too", which is the possible outcome for the big AI labs.

I'm not a fan of them either, I wish AMD would step up and compete with them better (Just get ROCm into a good place FFS!), but they are definitely not one of the companies most exposed to an AI pop. They'll stop being insanely profitable but they are not anywhere near the position of openAI and the likes who have massive negative profit.

From a quick look they have ~40B USD in liabilities and make ~115B USD gross profit. Being able to pay off the entirety of their debt with 4 months of profit seems pretty healthy to me.

It wont be Nvidia unless they play things incredibly badly, they're the only ones making actual profit by selling shovels in the goldrush.