DNA methylation and histone modification promote changes in chromatin structure that may affect gene expression in a heritable manner without directly altering the genome. As such, these phenomena are considered to be epigenetic in nature and are believed to contribute to the normal processes of human development but also to aberrant disease states such as cancer. Epigenetic processes probably contribute mechanistically to toxicant-induced changes in gene expression and cancer. Nickel is a potent human carcinogen that has been shown to alter DNA methylation patterns and affect histone acetylation status. Both of these changes are associated with the proximity of the affected regions to heterochromatin. The two processes probably occur in concert in mammalian cells. However, in yeast cells, DNA methylation is absent, and nickel is capable of regulating gene expression through changes in acetylation of the lysine residues in the N terminal tail of histone H4. Arsenic is another important environmental carcinogen, and it is methylated during its metabolism. Hence, it has been proposed that arsenic metabolism may deplete intracellular methyl group stores and thereby lead to changes in DNA methylation that may be involved in carcinogenesis. However, the data concerning DNA methylation changes following arsenic exposure are equivocal, leading researchers to propose that DNA hypo- and hypermethylation are both important in the development of arsenic-induced cancers. Heightened awareness by toxicologists of the importance of epigenetics in normal human development and in carcinogenesis should lead to the identification of other toxicants that manifest their effects, at least in part, via epigenetic mechanisms.

---

context: I live in a mountain town, offroad vehicle makes sense. I own a 4 bedroom, 3 bathroom home and live alone. Paid cash. Practicality is more important to me. I basically live like a degenerate IRL too. Flauting wealth via status symbols (ie: vehicles) doesn't make sense to me.

---

It would surprise me if Elon _didnt_ try something like that to pump TSLA via SpaceX Any tsla short is, of course, still enormously risky.

---

All of Elon's companies are on a 200 year timeline between the underground loops, the self driving everything, the sex robots, the brain chips, and now the trips to mars via SpaceX. You are buying a company who will not return until your kids are raw dogging his Tesla robots.

---

Have you already made market analysis? Examined private financials of every company out there? There are companies making lots of money via selling quite sophisticated solutions which either save other companies time/expenses or offer new business edge. Everybody only hears about Palantir and starts crying about how expensive it is, and thinks that’s the only AI solutions vendor, but fails to explore outside of own small box. The truth is there are lots of other companies, profitable and not so much, and it’s just the beginning, you can’t build the whole new industry in a matter of just few years. That’s not to say there won’t be losers, it’s like any other industry, however this one spans across pretty much every other industry in the existence and that’s why the addressable market is so large that it’s impossible to comprehend for those with limited curiosity.

---

The “compare launch MSRP vs launch rental rate” lens is useful, but it’s only part of the story. I'm looking at today’s economics. I.e. what people actually paid for H100/A100 hardware vs what they can rent it out for now . See my other comments where I did the math using today's rates. If older GPUs naturally drift cheaper as H200/Blackwell arrive that’s fine ONLY if the owner has largely paid down the original capex. The problem is a lot of this gear was bought in the last 1-3 years at peak pricing during the VC spending spree via these providers. When rental rates get pushed down toward or below full cycle breakeven while the loans are still outstanding, the age doesn’t save you. it just means you’re servicing yesterday’s gear / capex with today’s compressed cash. In that sense falling H100/A100 rental prices are a red flag. They show current supply/demand and ROI pressure on recent purchases, not just a normal generational price. And it’s not like most of this gear was bought for cash. Look at the public disclosures from the AI infra players we CAN see. CoreWeave has raised well over $10B in secured debt facilities for GPUs and data centers, and Oracle AI build out is explicitly tied to a debt load north of $100B. That’s before even getting into Nvidia‑linked financing and co‑signed deals. This isn’t a clean, pay as you go upgrade cycle. It's a lot of leverage that only works if rental economics hold up...which right now they don't seem to be at all. It looks more like scalp demand padding Nvidia’s books than durable, self funding infrastructure...and that can only run so long before the financing and ROI math collide and investors get wise to all of this.

---

Such an uneducated take. Idiots without insurance are poors who hospitals won't charge anyway, just like they do now, the people who front the cost burden of idiots who can't pay is everyone with insurance via premiums rising. Read a book

---

The math is all there. Also you can use other trackers to see what the hourly rate is. For example alot of places are doing the h100 for 1.50 it's absurd. >The report highlights that NVIDIA’s A100 GPU, priced at approximately $199,000 at its 2020 debut, would require around $4 per hour in utilization over a five-year lifespan to break even. Average rental rates were about $2.40 per hour at the time, declining to roughly $1.65 today. Remember as well these companies have bought these units via financing. Meaning they also have interest rates to pay on all the loans. This whole thing is pointing to an underutilization and oversupply because if the demand was there they wouldn't be dropping their pants on the pricing to this extent. You're also bringing up hyperscalers. This is a tangential market. But we can infer global demand by looking at the gou rental space only because if I'm a fortune 500 and needing GPUs which are sold out everywhere then this is a good portion of the market I'd be looking to fill the compute need. But the demand is clearly not there.

---

Market went downhill the moment AI started to be financed via debt

---

Just playing for a pull back. Moves like silvers always have pull backs. Key is timing. I was early Long term shiny metal bull via $GLD in my real port

---