Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Tesla EVs - TSLA -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Savant who wrote (26566)	10/25/2025 2:15:17 PM
From: longz	Respond to of 26581

Funny Eric cawledge guy missed that....

To: Savant who wrote (26566)	10/25/2025 2:29:16 PM
From: kidl	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 26581

While I agree with you on the 99.999 whatever percent, isn’t this synonymous with what we have come to expect from computers and more recently from AI?

To: Savant who wrote (26566)	10/25/2025 11:31:56 PM
From: i-node	1 Recommendation Recommended By longz Respond to of 26581

That was pretty a pretty extreme analysis. The diminishing marginal utility of 9s at that level becomes problematic. I assumed he was sort of exaggerating his perspective for effect. While the March of nines does become more expensive as you go, recent changes to 8 bit math from 32 bits has allowed a quadrupling of processing speed with only a 1% reduction precision—good enough for this work. At the same time, processors are generally faster so it does cost less to add a nine vs three years ago. In addition, these speeds will continue to improve. Most importantly, you do not need five or six nines to outperform human drivers, who do everything from driving drunk to running red lights to driving home exhausted after a hard days work or staying up late late watching movies. There are applications where precision is essential, but this is not one of them at this point in time.