Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:The AI bubble (Score 1) 61

This is why everyone and their grandmother is all in on AI. It's adoption lags for the sole reason of "people haven't caught up with what it can do, and learned how to let it do it".

I really want you to explain why you know better than the MIT researchers quoted in the summary who determined you are wrong. Most jobs can't be replaced by current LLM, that's what they found. Why do you disagree with it?

Comment Re:What is thinking? (Score 1) 259

ok look. "Thinking" is defined with extreme mathematical rigor. It's not completely defined, but we can definitely rule some things out.

Of course, I don't have time to explain all the math here, so as an example I used the fact that rocks don't think. However, some people like you idiotically tried to argue that rocks do think. You are a moron! Why are you even arguing that??? Get off the internet for a while.

Comment Re:I thought we were saving the planet? (Score 1) 143

FYI, their statement about Iceland is wrong. BEV sales were:

2019: 1000
2020: 2723
2021: 3777
2022: 5850
2023: 9260
2024 (first year of the "kílómetragjald" and the loss of VAT-free purchases): 2913
2025: 5195

Does this look like the changes had no impact to anyone here? It's a simple equation: if you increase the cost advantage of EVs, you shift more people from ICEs to EVs, and if you decrease it, the opposite happens. If you add a new mileage tax, but don't add a new tax to ICE vehicles, then you're reducing the cost advantage. And Iceland's mileage tax was quite harsh.

The whole structure of it is nonsensical (they're working on improving it...), and the implementation was so damned buggy (it's among other things turned alerts on my inbox for government documents into spam, as they keep sending "kílómetragjald" notices, and you can't tell from the email (without taking the time to log in) whether it's kílómetragjald spam or something that actually matters). What I mean by the structure is that it's claimed to be about road maintenance, yet passenger cars on non-studded tyres do negligible road wear. Tax vehicles by axle weight to the fourth times mileage, make them pay for a sticker for the months they want to use studded tyres, and charge flat annual fees (scaled by vehicle cost) for non-maintenance costs. Otherwise, you're inserting severe distortion into the market - transferring money from those who aren't destroying the roads to subsidize those who are, and discouraging the people who aren't destroying the roads from driving to places they want to go (quality of life, economic stimulus, etc)

Comment Re:according to google.... (Score 1) 143

Road maintenance isn't the only cost. Automobiles have a lot of externalized costs that are bared by the government besides just building roads. You need to constantly be building out new cities with new infrastructure in order to make room for cars and a car centric society.

You could tax the car companies themselves to pay for it but good luck with that. Realistically if you have the political power to do something like that you probably wouldn't have a car centric society that shifts billions of dollars of cost on to consumers.

Comment Re:2 out of 10 - Could do better. (Score 1) 143

Cars already have odometers which record and show mileage, they already have annual inspections where the value from the odometer is checked and recorded and there are already legal penalties for tampering with the odometer. It would be trivial to pull that data out of the existing database and levy taxes on the vehicle owner based on that.

Slashdot Top Deals

Before Xerox, five carbons were the maximum extension of anybody's ego.

Working...