This isn’t really true — a lot of the newer MoE models run just fine on a CPU coupled with gobs of RAM. Yes, they won’t be quite as fast as a GPU, but getting 128GB+ of VRAM is out of reach of most people.

You can even run Deepseek R1 671b (Q8) on a Xeon or Epyc with 768GB+ of RAM, at 4-8 tokens/sec depending on configuration. A system supporting this would be at least an order of magnitude cheaper than a GPU setup to run the same thing.

You evidently don’t know enough about logic and logical fallacies to grasp what I’m saying. I don’t think it’s worth spending any more time on. Take care.

Yes I know, it’s the way the argument is put with “You have to understand”, as if I wasn’t aware of a very obvious fact.
Put together with the bubble comment, he argues like a camouflaged MAGA, using “you too” arguments.

Cool, now we’re getting somewhere. I agree with you! I’ll ask you for a THIRD time, have you read the article that I shared a link to? Because if you do, you’ll see why what you describe here is not an ad hominem, no matter how condescending, presumptuous, or rude the commenter might be.

So do you think that’s an OK comment to our discussion?

I’m not passing any judgement on whether anything is an “OK comment.” In fact, on the topic being discussed, I think I agree with you more than the person you’re replying to. As I said though, I only stopped by to comment on your fallacious claim that the person committed an ad hominem, because it’s super fucking annoying to me when people throw that term around when they don’t know what they’re doing.

you must understand you are wrong, because “obvious fact”

THIS PART IS THE PERSON’S ARGUMENT, no matter how good or bad as it might be, and no matter how much it is surrounded by words that you view as insulting. In fact, if anyone is resorting to an ad hominem here, it’s you, by attacking their character and dancing around the actual meat of their argument (again, as good or bad as it might be). Therefore I hope you agree with me that the other commenter did not commit an ad hominem fallacy. Or did you not read the link I posted yet?

Ok buddy, you only quoted part of what I said. Did you even read the post I linked to? You’re wrong; it’s cool though, we all make mistakes. Accept it and move on.

You don’t just get to call any words that you don’t like, or even words directly attacking you, an ad hominem. A statement is only an ad hominem if 1) it’s attempting to refute an argument 2) by attacking the character/motive of the person making the argument INSTEAD OF the actual content of the argument. “Your argument is wrong because you’re an idiot” is an ad hominem. What the other commenter said to you is not. Note that people claiming “ad hominem” on statements that are not are sometimes said to be committing an “ad hominem fallacy fallacy.”

https://laurencetennant.com/bonds/adhominem.html

I actually agree with you on the Amazon/Youtube/Meta thing and I’m trying my hardest to stop using all those companies, but I think another point here is that Twitter is much more directly connected to fascism, given that it’s owned by the guy who just spent a week crashing the post-election party at Mar-A-Lago.

nitter.poast.org

Delete your account :)

I don’t have any skin in this game but just want to point out that “I understand you are hurt and angry” is an attempt to empathize with you, and not an ad hominem fallacy.