You will still gain size and strength without training, but obviously training produces much better results.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8637535/

that's why most bodybuilders take other drugs to counter the estrogen, like arimidex or aromasin. It definitely makes you bigger and stronger.

Almost like it's... vibe coded.

yeah, that seems obvious by now.

I use bbcp for that, it supports multiple streams.

https://docs.nersc.gov/services/bbcp/

A better feature would be a 2nd PIN that unlocks the phone to a secondary profile, which you would leave pretty bare for situations like these.

With some embarrassing porn; something that would make it feel legit and cause a distraction.

A few hundred personal dick pics and they'll be handing it back quickly.

Or smarter yet, not bare. Looks like a normal phone - innocent-looking vacation photos, innocent-looking social media accounts, innocent-looking email....

Many tech folks I work with fall into the trap in #31 and try to lecture people too often. From what I've been told, the "professor" style is a typical ASD trait. Very interesting.

The lengths companies will go to avoid running different pieces of software...

Most companies would be best served picking MySQL or PG and only adding something else if absolutely necessary. Every piece of software added increases complexity.

It can be easier and cheaper to solve problems via technology changes than operations and people

Now you only need MySQL expertise and maintenance rather than Redis and MySQL

The default should be that every additional piece needs to be justified

I guess it depends on how the replenishment process works. Unless you're ordering over 1000 of an item, I doubt it would be a problem.

replenishment is an unnecessary cludge that only exists due to poor design. an "algorithmical smell" if you wish

At what, 10 tokens per hour? These disk swapping methods all have the same drawbacks - kill your drive early, and slow as hell.

It says very prominently in the post: 4.5-5t/s for 80b on an M5

Isn’t it only writes that kill drives?

There's read disturb on SSDs, enough reads will eventually force controller to rewrite the cell and it's neighbours.

Practically if you're not streaming weights 24/7 from a full SSD, then it shouldn't be a problem.

Read disturb ought to be quite rare, especially on a fresh drive that was written only once or a handful of times (WORM-like usage). Practically, it's not likely to be an issue even with very heavy read workloads.

Hm, I asked 5.6 Sol to calculate/research and it came up with way less optimistic lifespan than Gemini (that I've asked last year).

It claims that each individual page read induces read disturb across whole block. And references https://arxiv.org/pdf/2501.02517 that tested Samsung 3D TLC and found ~518K sequential page reads in a block to be ECC threshold (although it's unclear how they got 518K number -- e.g. is it single worst chip they've tried? authors brings up 160 chip sample size later on).

With 7704 pages in a block that's only ~70 sequential block reads till data is lost and to retain data controller would have to refresh block fair bit earlier.. basically it gives modern 3D TLC SSD lifespan measured in months (1TB drive 24/7 sequential reads at 5GB/s).

Yeah, that's why most of these comments seem weird to me.

Yes for NAND, and I suppose nobody is using mechanical hard drives for this.

I'd like to see someone try it, just to see how incredibly slow and noisy it is.

Am I the only one that has no flash lifetime anxiety? I still have drives from more than a decade ago that keep on chugging fine.

I remember the time spinning rust was the only option and reliable they weren't. In 30 years of computing I have had more than ten hdds and zero ssds die.

No, flash is very durable. SSD's do die and they generally just go completely dead with no warning or any way to try any recovery. I've had a few go so far and I have a lot of old SSD's go in and out of machines.

No normal use should wear out a drive in any sensible time in reasonable use and even in unreasonable use they seem to last almost indefinitely. There's more likely to be some other kind of component death before that.

Of course, in staged lab test, it's probably possible to burn one out. I've seen projects do that on memory cards and various *ROM chips but don't recall seeing someone kill SSDs. That would get costly. But I'm almost sure a web search would turn out someone doing that.

I also used to be sure that 90's SCSI HDDs would never really stop running. Just the machines using them became too much work and no utility to keep going. I remember only one of mine that wouldn't start after some years in the storage, but I managed to hammer it back into shape.

At this point I don't even bother with it. Constantly falls back to Opus anyway, so I may as well save myself some time.