The way I think you'd set this up is you'd create a trust with the millions and then the trustees would pay the company its monthly fee from the trust's funds.
With enough funds, the trust should be able to both pay for your preservation and grow its balance. You'd even be able to inherit the remaining funds when revived.
Of course in practice there is still the possibility of the trustees being corrupt.
Here's a philosophical question. Does anyone account for inflation when looking at their long term history? I've been thinking of looking at everything in 2019 dollars.
It might also be useful to adjust for inflation going backwards, e.g. everything shows in 2025 dollars.
My neighbor just did the exact same thing.
The way FAT filesystems work is they change the first byte of the filename to an invalid character to make them a tombstone.
Since he hadn't used the SD card yet, we were able to restore the files with "TestDisk", a companion tool that ships with PhotoRec. Under "Advanced" there is an "Undelete" tool. This will let you browse the filesystem, find your missing files, and copy them to another drive.
For those old enough to remember, MSDOS came with undelete.exe which worked the same way.
Years ago, I recovered some pics from my honeymoon this way after we accidentally deleted them because I knew FAT worked this way so I just went looking for them.
In my imagination, I thought that the large GPU clusters were dynamically allocating whole machines to different tasks depending on load.
So, hypothetically, if ChatGPT's peak load and their minimum load were a 3× ratio, they'd reallocate 2/3 of their servers to training when it's not peak time.
Doing the same thing inside an individual GPU seems irrelevant to anyone operating at scale when they can approximate the same behavior with entire servers or even entire racks.
Sharing the big GPU cluster with non-latency critical load is one solution we also explored.
For this work, we are targeting more on the problem of smaller models running SOTA GPUs. Distilled/fine-tuned small models have shown comparable performance in vertial tasks.
Talk to the other vendors. I know of a place that had about that same amount and decided to have a redundant copy of all of their data in another vendor's S3-compatible product. That vendor paid for all of their egress fees as long as they signed a 12-month contract and used their tool for the migration.
The front-to-back symmetry is interesting. It may cause some confusion for other drivers, in some limited circumstances, when they can't tell which way the vehicle is facing.
It appears, based on my study of the footage on https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIRW8bfy4kE, that it could possibly switch which side is the front and the back by just changing the color of the lights. With RGB LEDs that would be pretty easy to do. But my question is, when would that be useful?
It would be neat that it could pull into a driveway and then leave in "reverse", but that doesn't seem like it'd come up that often for a robotaxi.
The back wheels look like they can steer. That's useful for parking in tight spaces.
I routinely had 8+h drives in the rear-facing seat of my family's circa 1970 Plymouth Satellite station wagon growing up. Completely unsafe, and very boring, but I don't recall barfing.
My sister and I would pass the time folding up a piece of paper and each of us got to draw part of a person without seeing what the other had drawn. Sort of like visual madlibs.
Both, plus absence of seat belts. Rear facing with no head support is a good way to snap your neck if you are wearing a belt, but because we weren’t, we’d probably be flying forward to the windshield.
Yes! That has been supported for a long while. At least on Android, go to Settings -> Chats -> Chat Backups. Set up a schedule and a passphrase and a folder, and it will export your chats every day.
I do that and then sync that folder with another computer using SyncThing.
> I do that and then sync that folder with another computer using SyncThing.
AFAIK SyncThing only monitors for changes between files with matching names, and Signal stores each backup with a separate (timestamped) filename. Are you storing every day's backup individually, or do you have some tool for deduplicating?
Encrypted backups can't be deduplicated unless the encryption is flawed. There shouldn't be a way to tell that one Signal backup is somewhat related to another, unless you have the passphrase.
That also means that Syncthing can't do better than sending the full backup. But if you're syncing via wifi (e.g. at home) it's not really a problem anyway.
> Encrypted backups can't be deduplicated unless the encryption is flawed.
Would you mind elaborating on why this would be an issue? 1) Tools like borgbackup provide the exact functionality you're describing and considered secure. 2) Encrypted file systems also don't re-encrypt your entire HDD whenever you change a single file.
> Encrypted backups can't be deduplicated unless the encryption is flawed
This isn't an encryption problem; each device can only have one instance of Signal installed, and the latest backup (assuming it has terminated successfully) is a superset of the previous ones (aside from any messages that have dropped from retention, which you presumably don't want to be preserving, by definition).
"Deduplicate" in this context means ensuring that you only have N backups in your remote storage, rather than cumulatively storing every day.
They do and have done for years now. There’s been a files app since 2017. They’ve had Advanced Data Protection available for iOS backups since 2022. Signal has just been lazy and found maintaining the Android backups to be a pain, so they refused to implement it for iOS.
From the point of view of iOS, yes it can (the person you're replying to is wrong, as explained by the other person who replied to them). But no, the Signal iOS app does not currently have that functionality.
They did support it since they released the Files app, as Signal shows. Nothing changed all these years, yet they're now rolling out backups for iOS too, so the technology is already there.
I used to work at a place that had a second copy of all the git repositories on a server, available over ssh. We could push there and then, at deploy time, instruct the servers to pull from that repo instead of bitbucket.
If I were to set up the same thing again today, I'd add some automation to automatically keep it in sync with github as well as automate the servers so that they'd attempt to pull from both on every deploy.
I share this as an idea for those who need an emergency or backup deploy mechanism.
I wonder if you could work around this problem by having two EBS volumes on each host, and write to them both. You'd have the OS report the write was successful as soon as either drive reported success. With reads you could alternate between drives for double the read performance during happy times, but quickly detect when one drive is slow and reroute those reads to the other drive.
We could call this RAID -1.
You'd need some accounting to ensure that the drives are eventually consistent, but based on the graphs of the issue it seems like you could keep the queue of pending writes in RAM for the duration of the slowdown.
Of course, it's quite likely that there will be correlated failures, as the two EBS volumes might end up on the same SAN and set of physical drives. Also it doesn't seem worth paying double for this.
With enough funds, the trust should be able to both pay for your preservation and grow its balance. You'd even be able to inherit the remaining funds when revived.
Of course in practice there is still the possibility of the trustees being corrupt.
reply