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.
> Here I'm talking about the bitcoin mining hardware when the said hardware first appeared.
even better, we take preorders, while we delay for 1 year, we run the ASICs ourselves with way outsized TH/s power compared to the world. Once we develop the next one, we release the 'new' one to the public with 1/10th of the power.
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.
The point is that in order to prove something by contradiction, you must assume something that turns out to be false and see what you can derive from that assumption (ideally a contradiction). The last link in the sibling comments does indeed contain proofs that the given premise is impossible. Think about how you know that the square root of 2 is irrational.
Lone pawn, as in doing directly for the strong person at the top (owners family?) what the top would never dare to order through the regular chain of command would not be quite as impossible.
I think the above is actually well crafted sarcasm. But it does highlight why as an engineer/developer it is important to get requirements in writing and have a process that shows why you made the changes you ultimately made.
I had that idea, but even with that, I'm still stuck. I get to a position with white king stuck behind the pawn on c3, with black pieces on a5, a6 and d6.
Or I start with dxe, take the white rook with the pawn, and end up with black pawn on a1 and white bishop on e6.
Another hint?
EDIT Oh never mind, finally got there. Just a slight tweak to the move order, which took forever to discover.
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.