They are only expensive because regulation, they are amongst the cheapest to build and operate in places like China which is why China is building them in droves. If you are serious about global climate change, you should let the countries that build solar panels use the solar panels instead of transporting them halfway across the world using bunker fuel so that they are forced to build coal instead to get the energy to build more solar panels.

How about, every country builds, uses and keeps their respective sources of energy, you donâ(TM)t transport energy until you are self sufficient on 100% solar panels or wind turbines, then you can export them. That will settle this grand debate for the next 300-1000 years.

lol, I see more products from China with fake RoHS and CE markings than legitimate ones.

So youâ(TM)re saying that Donald Trump did more to save the climate through laissez faire capitalism than Joe Biden or Obama through regulation. Hmmm..

For most if not all datacenter products, SSD is the best option for that size factor. If you need large cheap storage, 4 spinning disks fit in 1U and give you at least 40TB usable space (RAID10), if not more. If you go 12x6TB in that same 1U, you get not much more but you can get SSDs of that size for about the same or lower TCO once you include the 100W delta in power consumption. There is one company weâ(TM)re piloting a 1PB SSD solution in 3U with the back being mostly the power and the 24 ports 400G switch, they just cram SSDs, but you can replace a complete rack of spinning drives in 3U/1kW with massive performance gains.

Youâ(TM)re saying it is okay for military forces to embed themselves into civilian buildings with the goal that if they are attacked that it will also result in civilian casualties and you blame the opposing military force for that? Last I knew across history, people that use their own people or children as a shield in war are called cowards. Hell, even their own holy books they claim to uphold and want to spread across the region says it is an unforgivable sin.

That would exclude every single modern pop song, I hear Taylor Swift published a new property for the public domain.

I do think they are in the same line of business, they are both emulating once good software.

We know OpenAI has a lot (most of it actually) is shaped by hand. The actual base math models are open, itâ(TM)s not even OpenAIâ(TM)s product, but it is the filtering and keyword matching and other things that OpenAI (eg. the way it builds its databases) does that is considered the âalgorithmâ(TM). Just like Twitter is not âthe algorithmâ(TM), we all know how databases work and anyone can apply simple mathematical models to see what *should* be promoted or is viral, the question is what does Twitter do specifically to make certain things go viral or promoted vs other things that are objectively better and from the onset more popular, there is a human hand in that makes decision trees, and that is what the algorithm is.

That seems a bit like a circular definition. What does it mean to acquire and apply knowledge and skills, what are the parameters for success or even a positive result?

Basically if you follow the definitions of knowledge/skills you get right back to perception, information and synonyms of intelligence. So intelligence (in the human sense) is the capacity to acquire and apply intelligence (in the military sense), but we havenâ(TM)t defined concretely what that is, what components that has etc.

No, they do not, that has been a myth for a very long time and has been debunked by physics ever since. Right now the largest nuclear powers have the power to take out probably each other largest cities but not much beyond their centers. That is assuming they get to fire their entire arsenal without you know, getting hit back by both traditional and nuclear weaponry. In that sense âthe worldâ(TM) would be a different place but by no means a nuclear wasteland. If you somehow got all the nuclear weapons of the world and spaced them out properly, you may be able to lay waste to a small to medium sized US state or perhaps a single country in the world, but not a place like Russia, for the surrounding countries/states that would be a big short-term problem, but beyond a thousand kilometers, those problems quickly are negated by existing, solar and other space radiation. The bigger problem are dirty bombs, which is what places like Iran and North Korea can conceivably build, basically long-term radioactive waste spread by conventional explosions, they could take out a city for a long term, but thatâ(TM)s about it, you get a Chernobyl contamination zone for maybe 50 years.

Chernobyl was a big open air dirty bomb explosion practically speaking and it took weeks for the west to figure out what exactly had happened, nuclear weapons burn relatively clean in comparison.

And the only way to make sure people did not use them was to develop them and refine them and once in a while demonstrate that you were willing to go all the way. The best way so far to make sure you do not get invaded every so often is to keep a nuclear or biological weapon in stock, even Saddam who ended up not having anything pretended to have them and while he maintained that lie, he was safe.

The problem is that the prices wonâ(TM)t ever get lower, they are going higher. You want 66% of your fleet in EVs by 2030, you better crank up production which means massive investments for a market that doesnâ(TM)t exist.

The average EV currently needs around 8 kilograms of lithium. With our current 22 million tonnes of reserves, we'd get 2.8 billion EVs. (this is according to a sustainability report, so that is an optimistic estimate). And that is mining out everything we know today, we get to about 20-25% of the population. Even if you somehow recycled 100%, no more than (the top) 20-30% of the population will ever get an EV, let alone 66%. Globally speaking that is everyone making $130k or more. And we are just talking lithium and mining out the next 50-100 year worth of reserves in the next 5 years, cobalt and other rare earths havenâ(TM)t even been taken into consideration.

Can you please provide prove of these massive claims you make. By all accounts and measures, local rail was a massive disaster, companies promised, went massively over budget, got massive state subsidies on the back of a burgeoning economy and still could not turn a profit, eventually the state absorbed all these companies and either bankrupted the city or made them into todayâ(TM)s bus systems.

Cars and busses provided a better product at lower total cost (which includes opportunity and convenience costs). Local rail could only keep everyone pent up into cities that were growing with people, pollution and crime. To date, you can follow the tracks in some cities by measuring overpopulation, poverty and crime drawing long lines.

Tesla has been running at a loss for all this time, the only profitable thing they sell is carbon credits and that is coming to an end as countries across the world are going through a massive recession (despite the politicians not willing to call it that, by all measures we are in a recession)

EVs have only become more expensive due to massive government subsidy and resource scarcity. There was a promise once to get an electric $25k luxury family sedan by 2024.