That wasn't *all* I said, but it is apparently as far as you read. But let's stay there for now. You apparently disagree with this, whnich means that you think that LLMs are the only kind of AI that there is, and that language models can be trained to do things like design rocket engines.

That's what I just said.

SpaceX can probably accelerate their flight schedule to accommodate Russian crew needs. There's the question of if Russia is able/willing to pay nearly $100m per seat. Their flights on Crew Dragon are currently paid through NASA in a seat exchange program where they provide flights from this site on Soyuz for US astronauts. They don't actually pony up the cash.

This launch site is also essential to attitude control of ISS. To refuel the ISS stabilizer thrusters and hold it steady while the gyroscopes are relieved periodically requires Progress modules launched from there. There isn't currently a backup plan for those services.

Why can't we fly the Russians to the space station like they did for us between the shuttle retiring and Dragon being crew certified?

Red Bull is at least $3/can.

A trailer full of Red Bull is about 70,000 cans. That's around $200K.

Sell for 1/3rd value and you have a good year's tax-free salary from one truckload.

They're $3/can retail. The store pays at most $2 each. Most likely $1.50 from Red Bull but there are many variables. So a trailer full of cans is around $140k if it's $2/can.

Grocery store margins are thin - the $1 margin is used to pay for transport, storage, store operations (utilities/etectricity, staff wages, etc), so the actual profit per can will fall down to 25 cents or so.

Let's assume for the sake of argument that OpenAI and its competitors are trying to do the right thing here and make their AIs as harm-free as possible.

Not everyone will be that responsible, however. Now that it has been demonstrated that a suitably sycophantic AI can compromise the psyches of significant numbers of people, it's only a matter of time before various bad actors start weaponizing their own AI models specifically to take advantage of that ability. "Pig butchering" will be one of the first job categories to be successfully replaced by AI. :/

Here's where the summary goes wrong:

Artificial Intelligence is in fact many kinds of technologies. People conflate LLMs with the whole thing because its the first kind of AI that an average person with no technical knowledge could use after a fashion.

But nobody is going to design a new rocket engine in ChatGPT. They're going to use some other kind of AI that work on problems on processes that the average person can't even conceive of -- like design optimization where there are potentially hundreds of parameters to tweak. Some of the underlying technology may have similarities -- like "neural nets" , which are just collections of mathematical matrices that encoded likelihoods underneath, not realistic models of biological neural systems. It shouldn't be surprising that a collection of matrices containing parameters describing weighted relations between features should have a wide variety of applications. That's just math; it's just sexier to call it "AI".

When I was a high school technology teacher I would show the students how to telnet into BBS systems around the world. They were not impressed in the least. Maybe now they will give the tech a second look. Time to dust off my Wildcat diskettes.

What always happens when you try to block kids from doing anything: they find a way to do it anyway.

We older folks too were "blocked" from doing stuff as kids, pre- and post-internet, and we too did it anyway. And it actually made us smarter, as we had to devise ways around the obstacle.

Kids are smart. This will just make them smarter.

and the product hasn't even become attractive and popular yet. OpenAI forgot that step...

.... and that would seem to indicate that IPv6 is currently handling around half of Internet traffic.

Question is, is it actually making it out on the Internet or just being used to tunnel IPv4 through it?

It's a serious question because LTE and 5G networks only handle IPv6 data - all data packets are IPv6. IPv4 traffic must be tunnelled through the mobile IPv6 network. (This is because obviously there are too many mobile devices). It's why CGNAT exists - to provide the IPv4 gateway to the Internet from the IPv6 only LTE and 5G networks

So yes, technically IPv6 is used for your cellphone data traffic, but it's just carrying IPv4 inside of it.

Or think of it this way, OpenAI had revenues of around $10B. But you already saw spending commitments of $100B+. And countless billions have been sunk into OpenAI by people who are expecting to 10x their investment

Even the most generous estimates don't have OpenAI making more than $50B in revenue by 2030, and they'll have to make more huge investments so it's still in the negative.

At the same time, those datacenter processors are extremely perishable in that in a few years what you have now is worthless.

It's a bubble that's going to pop. We'll still have AI - the dot-com bubble popped but we still have the Internet, and many companies survived it, notably ones like Amazon, eBay, and Google. ChatGPT will likely be around, but most of the others which aren't so popular will likely disappear unless they can find a source of revenue.

If AI-generated music can't be copyrighted, who gets to collect royalties?

No one. Except maybe a minor amount to the person who wrote the prompt (the only copyrightable part of the process). That's why streaming services are so keen to promote it heavily as it means they don't have to pay anything for the song.

That's probably the real reason why the song is being re-recorded. The AI generated version would technically not be under copyright, which means this very popular song could be used freely as it was in public domain and they would get no money out of it.

It's all about money in the end.

How much money would Apple save if it just fired their legal teams and instead modified their policies to abide by the law?

They are abiding by the law right now. The EU is examining if Apple Ads and Apple Maps are "big enough" to qualify under the law where previously they didn't.

Of course, I'm not exactly sure what it means - Apple Ads really applies only to Apple's services (App Store, Music, TV, etc). Are they expecting Apple to open those apps to supporting other ad networks? That would be like forcing a website to use other ad providers just because?

Ditto with Maps. Not quite sure what you get when they're "opened up"? Closest I can think of is maybe the embedded maps must be switchable, but then you'd think that would force Google to have to let their maps use some other maps as well (given Google Maps is a lot larger)?

I'm just confused as to what is being "opened up" in the end. Especially since you can use any navigation app on iOS, no EU needed. I mean I can choose from Google Maps, Waze or Apple Maps easily enough, and they all provide turn by turn navigation and Siri controls them all already, so I'm not exactly sure what Apple is "gatekeeping". Or does the EU expect to force Apple to produce an Android version?

What does an "opened up" maps app do?

I didn't do anything crazy like actually read the article, but I did go as far as to read the third sentence of the summary, which began like this:

.... and that would seem to indicate that IPv6 is currently handling around half of Internet traffic.