I'm sorry, that can be difficult, and I'm glad she was able to break free before it became an addiction. A girl I was seeing developed a major dependency on ChatGPT, and over just a few months, her lens grew increasingly insular and distorted.
AI was her confidant, reassuring her that her every thought was a masterful insight. As her beliefs decoupled more and more from reality, she became paranoid, distrustful, and unreceptive to ideas that didn't align with them. I asked her to stop and talk to a counselor, and she said she would, but after she was passed over for a professional opportunity that AI assured her she was the perfect candidate for, she didn't know who to turn to, or who to blame.
That night, we talked and said I love yous, and the next day I got an AI generated breakup text.
>Regardless of OS, they all seem extremely fast, and feel faster and faster as time goes on.
One analogy is that the distance between two places in the world hasn't changed, but we're not arriving significantly faster than we before modern jetliners were invented. There was a period of new technology followed by rapid incremental progress toward shortened travel times until it leveled off.
However, the number of people able to consistently travel between more places in the world has continued to increase. New airports open regularly, and airliners have been optimized to fit more people, at the cost of passenger comfort.
Similarly, computers, operating systems, and their software aren't aligned in optimizing for user experience. Until a certain point, user interactions on MacOS took highest priority, which is why a single or dual core Mac felt more responsive than today, despite the capabilities and total work capacity of new Macs being orders of magnitude higher.
So we're not really even asking for the equivalent of faster jet planes, here, just wistfully remembering when we didn't need to arrive hours early to wait in lines and have to undress to get through security. Eventually all of us who remember the old era will be gone, and the next people will yearn for something that has changed from the experiences they shared.
Oculink is generally faster than TB5 despite them both using PCIe 4.0, because Oculink provides direct PCIe access whereas Thunderbolt has to route all PCIe traffic through its controller. The benchmarks show that the overhead introduced by the TB5 controller slows down GPU performance.
It's not just the controllers; the Thunderbolt protocol itself imposes different speed limits. The bit rates used by Thunderbolt aren't the same as PCIe, and PCIe traffic gets encapsulated in Thunderbolt packets.
Maybe; I'm unable to find any benchmarks that specifically compare PCs with TB to Macs to test this. But there is certainly still overhead with TB no matter what, and therefore it'll never be as fast as Oculink.
Sure, but how big of a difference is there? Even inside a desktop PC, you typically have PCIe ports directly off the CPU and ones off the chipset, and the latency for the latter is double. But the difference is immaterial in practice.
I think latency is the wrong focal point (more important for gaming, plus Macs don't support eGPUs anymore). There aren't a lot of general workloads that require high sustained throughput, but the ones that do can benefit from TB5 scaling.
For instance, if you cluster Mac Studios over TB5 with RDMA, the performance can be pretty stellar. It may not be more cost effective than renting compute for the same tasks, but if you've got (up to) four M3 Ultras with a ton of RAM, you'll be hard pressed to find something similar.
That's still not more ideal than having native alternatives like OCuLink or something that can be networked like QSFP, but it's a fair way to highlight the current design's strengths.
That's just blatantly wrong, the performance loss of GPUs is very well documented and gets worse as you go towards higher end models. We're talking 30%+ loss of performance here.
Or cheapen it. We've got two draft house style theaters that are social experiences that show older reels, things from the public domain, and local and independent film. Door policies vary, but until the set feature time, it's just like a pub with an extra big screen in the back.
It's also cheaper to operate without box office staff and doesn't degrade the experience. People could be always be better, but I'd say big theater chains and Hollywood are really what are out of touch.
I like to go to the theater, but I've also got several grand in AV at home, largely because of what I find dissatisfying about the modern movie experience.
My grandfather told me until the 1960s, tickets were for all-day entry. Show up whenever for whatever was playing, which was generally run on loop. You could step out for a smoke, get a drink, eat at a local diner, and then head back in and possibly catch where you left off, or maybe pay a dime fee for re-entry. At some point, they started closing the doors after the feature started, and from there we got the modern business model.
At home, I can still do all of those things, and more.
I recently dated a DMA in her 30s, and while incredibly talented and respected within her field, she had no experience sharing a life with someone else. As selfish and unfair as she said she felt, she wasn't wasn't ever willing to compromise.
I'm not new to dating educated professionals, and it seems to be an unfortunate recurrence balancing being torn between wanting a partner and family and worrying that any misstep could jeopardize their career or cost them opportunity.
> I'm not new to dating educated professionals, and it seems to be an unfortunate recurrence balancing being torn between wanting a partner and family and worrying that any misstep could jeopardize their career or cost them opportunity.
There exist a large number of very smart people who are not that career-obsessed (the traits that you need for a fast career are rather different from "highly smart").
I consider it to be likely that you value character traits that made the partner predestinied for a successful career, but don't like the fact that because of this, they are often obsessed about their career.
AI was her confidant, reassuring her that her every thought was a masterful insight. As her beliefs decoupled more and more from reality, she became paranoid, distrustful, and unreceptive to ideas that didn't align with them. I asked her to stop and talk to a counselor, and she said she would, but after she was passed over for a professional opportunity that AI assured her she was the perfect candidate for, she didn't know who to turn to, or who to blame.
That night, we talked and said I love yous, and the next day I got an AI generated breakup text.
In the end, I was dumped by a chat bot.
reply