Human see something, memorize it, then use those memory , to make their own manual (error filled) copy, or warp it deform it intentionally, or even make something completely new in the same style or a different style. You CANNOT feed AI all the realist current, and get at the end cubist painting. AI cannot do what human do. The best analogy would be that picture AI is mostly using *tracing* to copy part of something adhoc, and then apply a few mathematical geometrical operation to copy/paste the traced blocks. Chat AI only do major correlation between words and do string words based on a probabilistic way. It cannot on its own come up with something new. It cannot *comprehend* what it write , it is just copy/pasting based on giant correlation matrix and mathematical operation.

Human creating a painting , EVEN one based on inspiration, function fundamentally differently on HOW they get the result.

The brain consume for the average adult 0.3 kWh per day (https://bond.edu.au/news/how-much-energy-do-we-expend-using-our-brains) or about 0.3 kCal not 3 (

And itâ(TM)s equivalent to 260 calories or 1,088 kilojoules (kJ) a day

) as a fun comparison , that correspond to the energy in about about 65g of sugar. But your point still stand.

Less than 1/3200 amount of emission of the USA. You would need 3200 of such project to have make the USA contribution to GW zero, and 1/18000 of global emission. If that CO2 is captured at the source , OK fine that is some we avoid in the atmosphere, but that's an drop in an ocean...

1.8 billion hours in average per month, that's on the order of magnitude of 10 hours twitch a month per user. That's fucking broad in my view. And the "most people don't play game" was maybe true back in 2000 or 2010, but nowadays gamer back from 1990 or 2000 are now getting older (for reference I am 50+).

"According to a survey conducted in October 2022, 70 percent of adults in the United States played video games on at least one platform. In comparison, 30 percent of U.S. adults did not play video games at all."

Gaming is now widespread, maybe not console gaming, but you are overlooking the BIGGEST gaming market : phone. When you start with such a wrong premise, is it worth reading the rest of your post ?

All of those are decided by manager at higher level than the dev. After the decision has been done the dev has the choice between : 1) refusing to implement it and get fired 2) do it and get their bread and home. Unless you are independently rich there is no other choice. The fact ACM media and you accuse the dev - the cog in the machine - rather than the management and CEO and billionaire is quite telling.

If you look at the number of scientific article on global cooling and global warming, you would see that even from the start it was a crushing minority of global cooling article something like 3 out of 40 for warming (and the trend during that 60ies and 70ies decade went worst , the decade afterward it was 1 for 400 and so on to the point nobody whatsoever is putting any global cooling article by the 80ies). But denier gotta deny , so they will ignore that and continue to tout the global cooling myth.

Beaming back the energy from your installation in space in concentrated and safe manner would be magnitude harder - the microwave beam would need a very large collector surface and near the point of usage... Degradataion would be more significant with the large collective surface (micrometeorite, cosmic ray, solar storm) It is much easier to do something on the ground, and find a way to store it, than try to get that power from space on the ground. Not even counting, to make sense you would need a quite large installation at something like geostationary orbit which is 1) expansive - 11K$ per pound 2) use a lot of energy just to put it there 3) very minor point but forget doing astronomy on that part of the sky (maybe a small part but still). You can have better tech on the ground for a fraction of the cost. Heck du bist auch Deutscher , so du magst es nicht hÃren aber Nuklear würde tausend mal mehr Sinn machen als so eine unternehmen.

If you have X kWh in space, you can simply install 5*X on ground and easy to maintain it, keep up to date and replace, and simply add a physical or electro-chemical battery or whatever method to store the energy : it will still be far far more efficient than sending stuff in orbit , even at 1000$ per Kg, have them fail through micrometeorite or degrade, mis-align the beam back etc.... Really, space solar make zero sense whatsoever even at 120$ pr pound.

"The people who once would have been chambermaids and switchboard operators are mostly employed in better jobs today. "

Firstly, nowadays job reconversion is super hard. Far more likely people will get crap job , gig economy, be super fragile economically, etc...

Secondely, for the time period you are speaking of, there were very obviously other type of job opening coming up. That is emphatically NOT the case nowadays where well paid job are lost and don't come back.

There MAY be a few landlord which are good. I never encountered one. My guesstimate is that most will do what is financial sound : push the rent as high as possible and spend the least possible. And for the majority of renter it will lead to very sub optimal situations.

"I expect that this culture of having no children will die out in the USA, and for reasons that should be obvious."

The reason are not obvious. Cost of rising a child augment, whereas salary of the lower paid people never rise as much. You end up in a situation where soon a well educated single child is enough to bankrupt a family, or you make all family 3rd world poor with no future prospect. The ONLY way the culture of not having children will die out, is if the republican manage to outlaw contraception.

Tell me what is more insightful. Let us say 1 person post the non source 10000 person read the article. So you are saying essentially 10000*10 seconds of time should be lost (about 28 hours) + whatever kWh lost doing that search ? The OP would have lost 10 seconds by posting the original source.

Rather than lambasting the people lamenting the first scenario , you should be lambasting , throwing poo at the OP which generate such an immense waste of resource both finite (our time on earth and energy). Look at all those not citing primary source and take those 10 seconds and multiple by all reader and all instance where this happened on slashdot , or heck the world at large. The loss in energy and lost time is tremendous.

Your ire is utterly misplaced. The poster is right to have asked for a non paywalled source, and at least a primary source. Instead you attack the WRONG person.

Sir, you are a short sighted idiot.

"the word "doctor", when it actually meant physicians"

In some country you always say doctor , when the qualification is physician. e.g. in french you always say doctor. In fact even some translation tool do the exact same issue you cite : e.g. here is what I got from medicà : "Dictionary. médica noun, feminine (plural: médicas f) doctor n (plural: doctors) physician n."

"chances are you're in the 1%" No. At 1 million dollar yearly (roughly) you start to be in the global 1%

:

The data from the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) shows that in 2021 annual wages for the top 1% reached $819,324,

https://www.investopedia.com/personal-finance/how-much-income-puts-you-top-1-5-10/ . For reference the top 1% earning is 11 million a year in the US. Most on slashdot won't earn 20% of 800K per year. https://www.aximdaily.com/how-...

How much income puts you in the top 1%, 5%, and 10% Globally?

Below are some estimates of the average earnings of those in the top 1%, 5%, and 10% globally:

Top 1%: At least $896,490 per year
Top 5%: At least $343,000 per year
Top 10%: At least $173,000 per year

In fact the top 10% being 170K , I am betting msot on slashdot won't manage that :
"How much does a Software Developer make in USA? The average software developer salary in the USA is $107,300 per year or $51.59 per hour. Entry level positions start at $85,019 per year while most experienced workers make up to $148,260 per year."

Even top dev aren't in the top 10% global.

That has zero impact on his health though.