it couldn’t have come sooner.

I mean, it could have. And very probably should have.

“Vote my crotchers”

Crazy that it’s log4j exposing an issue instead of being one

Imagine if his replacement did the same thing.

Trump has no desire to actually complete the ballroom because it’s so great at being a bribe factory.

I canceled prime last year and have made a concerted effort to not use Amazon anymore. It’s difficult, because Amazon is everywhere, but not impossible.

Yeah, I feel he actually has a case he can win if they do sue for breach of contract.

You’re 100% right.

I’m positive they were all vaping already.

Feel like this clashes with “respect is earned, not demanded” which I feel more strongly

Edit: That said, I do also believe that people should be treated with respect by default.

Love these.

Just want to clarify that “we’ll cross that bridge when we get there” is closer to “work on one problem at a time” than implying the problem will sort itself out.

“How can there be world hunger if I have a sandwich?”

Just a reminder that your experience isn’t necessarily the common one.

RIP to a legend

Latest version of photoshop keeps pushing AI tools anyway, so they’re interchangeable imo

I never said or implied that it’s useless. You’re deriving meaning where there is none. It’s a tool and tools are always useful. Here’s an example of a supercomputer (not AI) designed to solve unresolved mathematical equations and scientific problems

Same idea, doesn’t need AI to do it.

My point was, and is, that it cannot replicate human intelligence and that it doesn’t have intelligence on its own.

How do you get “it isn’t useful” out of that? If you have to extract a wild interpretation out of what (I thought) were pretty clear words, your argument isn’t as strong as you think it is.

And yes, I read the article. It’s speculative for existing data centers, which are the problem. There’s no incentive for them to spend the money to switch to closed loop.

New data centers aren’t incentivized to go that route either aside from the environmental impact. It would be nice if they were, though.

Closed loop isn’t viable for data centers.

Do me a favor and quote my original text where I said they can’t do anything useful. I’ll wait.

Agreed

Data centers use evaporative cooling, not closed loop. You can’t really scale up in a closed loop system. Evaporative utilizes a ton of water.

As for point 3, supercomputers have been assisting with scientific problems for decades now. This isn’t new, just new tech applied. Your article is actually the best way to use AI, imo. It will be better at finding patterns in data than humans will ever be.

But my point is to say would it have been able to discover that those math problems existed in the first place?

No. The answer is no.

This is nice and everything, but this whole thing is just a huge marketing push by AI companies. AI is not going to kill us. At least not directly (see point 2).

1. You need prohibitively expensive equipment to host AI. That equipment needs to be plugged in. If it were truly dangerous, you just need to unplug it.

2. You need a lot of water to cool the equipment that can run a supposed super intelligence. If we pass regulations about how much of our environment these data centers can destroy, that would curb the abilities of this superintelligence.

3. AI is fucking dumb. AI is a misnomer since it doesn’t actually have any intelligence. It is derivative and cannot perform any necessary tasks that actually drive intelligence. For example, it will be able to tell you every established law in any field of science because it has that information in its corpus, but it will never be able to establish a new law. Or discover anything new in any field.

This whole thing is a push to get people to believe that AI is more capable than it really is so that these companies can draw more money from investors so that 'they’d be able to implement proper safeguards."