waiting for month for a refund (and having lost access to the pro plan immediately but no immediate refund) is definite grounds for chargeback.

there is no human on the other end of the chain, and I bet that chargebacks are how they issue refunds (ie relying on the "nuclear" option as the standard practice of how refunds fundamentally works at their company.

ie "don't need to answer emails about refunds, because if they really wanted their money back, they'd issue a chargeback" as part of the regular procedure.

a lot of companies do this, and it's a common way of minimizing customer support budgets.

Unless you're big cheese, too many disputes can get a company cut off. Disputes aren't free to mediate, there's a cost to handle each one.

Visa/MC can block a company, happens for lots of reasons.

The more people use chargebacks to get around black hole customer service the better, because it is difficult for companies to blacklist everyone. If they don't want to pay the mediation fee, they should provide customer service in the first place.

There's a misunderstanding here. I'll make it clearer.

The "Unless you're big cheese" is the company you're doing the charge back against.

If a company, such as Anthropic has too many chargebacks? Visa/MC can ban them from their network. It happens to smaller companies all the time, mostly because it costs Visa/MC + the banks involved to deal with each chargeback, and also, it's typically a sign of fraudulent behaviour.

Visa/MC are not a charity, or are payment processors. They need profit. Take it away by creating all this extra work, chargeback work, and they're not making money any more.

The "big cheese" part is, if you're amazon or google, things can be negotiated at that scale. Maybe they pay a larger settlement fee, whatever. And of course Google Play, or Amazon utterly dwarfs Anthropic CC activity at this point, even though they have a large valuation and potential future ahead.

Still, I have no idea what the background metrics and profit points are for Visa/MC, only that I've seen even medium sized companies have issues with too many chargebacks. And, we've all seen Visa/MC decide they don't like gambling, or porn sites and just drop them. Some of those companies were quite large and had a lot of flow for them.

So I don't think many companies will just use chargebacks as a support mechanism. That is, unless they're just completely incompetent.

at this point Anthropic/OpenAI have enough equity to buy out the entire Visa and Mastercard ecosystems.

It's all fake venture capital money, but they are the big cheese.

Having equity doesn't mean they can buy it, and regardless, that doesn't mean Visa/MC will work for free, or the banks/payment processors. Too many charge backs from an account, and that's the result.

It's unclear how large their retail business is, which is why I mentioned that, and that's where you see most CC payments. Companies with any serious usage are going to pay via wire or bill payment via banks directly. McDonalds, for example, likely has a larger daily spend on cards.

good target for the Louvre thieves!

the indiana jones warehouse.

Arguably the science museum London already had one. They lost a bit of donated science bits over many years due to lack of maintenance and records management.

TOP men…

American economics doesn't allow fabrication of semiconductors even if there is the know how.

Think about how Intel, who pioneered the know how, can't build cutting edge nodes in the levels that they need to make it profitable.

IBM had to sell their fabs to cater to the whims of "shareholders".

It's the greed of stockholders that you need to blame.

TSMC is a publicly traded company just like the others. I'm not familiar with their governance but Google tells me the largest owner (a state development fund) has 6%.

They have a special advantage because they don't compete with their customers, which leads to trust, which leads to customers paying for their R&D for them.

Intel on the other hand just kind of sucks at their job. Skill issue basically. (But they aren't /that/ far behind.)

doesn't this just mean the spec is overwritten? (and covering things that are not in use by the dominant engines)

It's useless to get a higher score on compliance than the leading engines because ... no one else can use them.

The specs and the test suite are both moving targets. There are regularly new proposals to the specs, and new tests that cover them as they progress towards acceptance. The main engines implement these proposals behind feature flags, and only enable them once the proposal has been fully accepted.

Ladybird does not hide implementations behind feature flags (yet) because there's no need when you don't have users. So its score on test262.fyi includes all proposals it has implemented thus far.

The other engines on that site have an "experimental options" variant to include these proposals, which is a bit more of an honest comparison. As of right now, that shows: Spidermonkey (Firefox) at 98.3%, V8 (Chrome) at 97.9%, LibJS (Ladybird) at 96.9%, and JavaScriptCore (Safari) at 93.2%.

Here's a link with those options selected: https://test262.fyi/#|v8_exp,jsc_exp,sm_exp,libjs

Probably that there are already several generations of TPU hardware - the best ones go to internal use, while the older hardware gets rented out to gcp to amortize the development costs.

That's correct. Unless Zuck is OK with using one-generation older TPU, which is a possibility.

It's the ouroboros - snake eating its own tail.

this case is conductive, precisely so the excess charge can be grounded by the power supply by being in touch/contact with the psu metallic casing.

the psu is grounded, but the static has no way of getting to ground (via psu) if the case itself is non-conductive.

The black market is "if you have to ask then you are already not qualified"

unless you are an agent posing questions to get people to sink themselves.

current gen AI is Pakleds of Star Trek TNG.

Give them a bit of power though, and they will kill you to take your power.