Don't set your goals so low. We already reached 17k on a small models.
Since the whole goal of software architecture schemes it to allow the rest of us non-geniuses to still understand it and modify it, perhaps the same could be true of llms.
Perhaps a million-per-second hypothetical (small) model can be more useful than a state of the art big one.
It's worse than that. One side of the "circle" is 40 billion, the other side is 300. Why not just subtract it, and say 260 billion is going one way.
The real story is that Nvidia is accepting equity in their customers as a payment for their hardware. "What, you don't have cash to buy our chips? That's OK, you can pay by giving us 10% of everything you earn in perpetuity."
This has happened before, let's call it the "selling the goose that lays golden eggs scan." You can buy our machine that converts electricity into cash, but we will only take preorders, after all it is such a good deal. Then, after bulding the machines with the said preorder money, they of course plugged the machines in themselves instead of shipping them, claiming various "delays" in production. Here I'm talking about the bitcoin mining hardware when the said hardware first appeared.
Nvidia is doing similar thing, just instead of doing it 100% themselves, they are 10% in by acquiring the equity in their customers.
I have found it that if you invest some time in learning how to write quality for loops, the quality indeed goes up.
Also, when writing for loops, you have to explicitly think about your exit condition for the loop, and it is visible right there, at the top of the loop, making infinite loops almost impossible.
There is an informational asymmetry, so rogue exchanges can lie all they want without you knowing for sure, and those that do not want to give you your money for whatever reason always do (lie that is).
This happened with MtGox and permanent withdrawal problems, both with USD and BTC.
With USD, it was "Oh, no, its the banks, they are limiting us to $50.000 per day, it's not us".
With BTC, it was "Oh, no, Bitcoin network has a bug, we cannot process withdrawals, it's not us".
No, total dollar amount of electricity expenses spent on mining does not depend on the price of electricity.
Today, miners are getting paid about $1.5 billion per month. If they like money, they will keep adding new miners and run them until they all in total spend less than, but close to that amount.
So, $1.5 billion per month of fresh money needed to offset this pressure on Bitcoin price.
There goes the argument that Bitcoin is a good "store of value."
"It's weird how so many of the arguments against what I've originally written pretend that it matters whether the reward comes from a block reward or transactions fees. It does not matter."
"It does matter."
Miner do not care, so it does not matter.
This is amazing to watch. hn_throwaway_99 complains that he only gets handwaving and circular arguments against this, only to get multiple answers which are exactly that.
Mining will always spend a large chunk (>50%? depends on the complete distribution of efficiency off all miners) of rewards on electricity. A quick search shows this to be 0.5% of all electricity used in the world. If Bitcoin price goes up 10x right now, this would shortly increase to around 5%.
But, there is also a thing that miners still have to pay electricity in dollars or whatever, so they are forced to sell on exchanges. This creates a downwards pressure on Bitcoin price.
Currently this could be somewhere around $billion per month. So, you need a billion a month of fresh sucker money, just for the bitcoin price to stay the same.
Miners put the price (in dollars) in the blocks, and the medium price is taken as the price. You get penalized if the price you put in is 1 standard dev. or more off. You get 1% less of the block award you would get normally.
Since the whole goal of software architecture schemes it to allow the rest of us non-geniuses to still understand it and modify it, perhaps the same could be true of llms.
Perhaps a million-per-second hypothetical (small) model can be more useful than a state of the art big one.