Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Something to consider (Score 2) 169

The only way you can lose heat in space is through radiation. But radiation carries momentum. Not much per photon, but it was enough to cause the Pioneer probes to move in unexpected ways. This means you have to emit equal amounts of heat towards Earth and towards space. If your resultant is zero, then you're fine. You can even direct some of the heat backwards. It won't do a huge amount, but every bit of atmospheric drag you overcome, the less fuel you need to use to stay in orbit.

So you basically need absolutely gigantic radiators behind the space-based data centre, located inside a parabolic dish that will generate drag of its own (not to mention a potential difference betwen the lower and upper sections).

This is an insane level of complexity. You're better off parking it in a stable orbit between the Earth and the moon, so it's absolutely clear of atmospheric effects. You're still going to need radiators, but it's marginally better as you don't have to do quite so much directing of it. The latency would be horrible, maintenance would be next to impossible, and there's all kinds of other issues to consider.

No, I don't think you can make this workable.

However, space might be useful. This very same issue of heat only being radiated means that you can make wafers with much more even loss of temperature, no dust, bacteria, or dirt, and much lower gravity. If you were to make extremely high quality wafers (silicon or gallium arsonide) in space, then you should be able to make WSI processors, which should in turn reduce the demands that datacentres make.

The time it would take to set all this up would be about the same time as it took for IBM to perfect its stacked transistor topology. Intel was talking 90 cores per wafer-scale CPU a few years back - the shrinkage in transistors since then plus the x10 density IBM proposes might push you to 1800 cores per wafer, provided you can get the quality high enough. Which, in space, is quite possible.

You wouldn't need your datacentres in space. Your wafer-scale CPU plus packaging would be about the same size as a CD drive. You could pretty much dispense with datacentres at that point. A typical tower will have two spare bays. "Cartridge datacentres" could simply be plugged in as needed. A regular CPU-based cartridge for heavy general-purpose computing, a GPU-based cartridge for LLMs. Yes, home users would have power usage through the roof, but then it's no longer your problem.

Comment Re:Why is this of interest here? (Score 2) 168

Was anyone ever invested in Supergirl though?

I'm told she's had some well-liked stories.

Still, James Gunn seems to have this obsession with pulling up C-list characters from the comics and putting them in central roles in movies. For a lot of the running length of Superman, it was a movie about some guy named Mr. Terrific that nobody's ever heard of. I assume this is because he wants to tell new stories, rather than rehashing the same old origins and motives for characters that everybody's known about for years. But it's not the same as actually introducing new, appealing ideas; these characters are C-listers for a reason. Nobody cares.

Comment Re:Second Movie In a Row Saving a Dog (Score 1) 168

She fights this evil character multiple times and could take the antidote at any point. Of course, she doesn’t because that’d be the end of the movie.

Haven't seen the movie, but I've heard it's not just that ... she also apparently spends a lot of the movie not seeming to believe there's much urgency to the situation at all. That has a way of hamstringing the idea of a "ticking clock" plot.

Comment Re:Amazon is corrupt! (Score 4, Insightful) 22

I think it may be evidence that Amazon has a shitty corporate culture that squeezes every penny it can out its employees.

Corruption can happen anywhere, but it's more likely to happen in totalitarian cultures where people feel like the system is rigged anyway. That's why countries like Russia and China have corruption problems. But I suspect the same feelings of me vs. the system occur in a capitalist enterprise like Amazon where employees are governed by dystopian, rigid, computerized metrics.

Comment This is an interesting topic, at least to me. (Score 1) 2

I have been stress-testing AIs with increasingly complex projects for some time. The Chinese AIs struggle, but actually do a FAR better job of handling massively complex tasks than Grok, and Gemini just rolls over and whimpers at anything above a very low level of complexity.

What I've found is that the Chinese AIs tend to be sycophant but do "understand" complex projects properly in that you can ask specific technical questions and the answers will be generally very accurate. Any sort of critical analysis is beyond them, though. (Ether that, or I'm a mega-genius. Which....doesn't sound terribly likely.)

Of the "Top AIs", ChatGPT is good on basics but is incapable of any kind of detailed generation. Claude is brilliant at detailed generation, but overloads with anything but a tiny data set.

I've been putting up the projects on Gitlab for a while, so anyone who wants to see an AI break down and cry in despair is able to do so.

The secret tools don't bother me - they'll have long understood how to use Big Data and Analysis of Competing Hypotheses. AI isn't going to find out any more than combinations of those tools will, because that's basically all AI is - a Big Data classification system.

Submission + - The MOST artificial intelligence is Chinese? (linkedin.com) 2

shanen writes: Pardon my clickbait and quasi-joke Title suggestion, but the topic has been on my mind for a while. I have not been pursuing the research topic seriously, though I did take several close looks at DeepSeek when it was the center of hoopla and have sometimes benchmarked against it since then. But this summary of new Chinese AI was just pushed at me by the AI-empowered algorithms of LinkedIn and I'm wondering how seriously I should take it.

If we (non-Chinese?) were actually technically ahead of them (Chinese heathens?) then this would not be an issue. Unlike the computer security race we lost a few years ago? However the real concern is not with these public AI tools, but with the secret ones, both government and private... (Bond villain conspiracy theories, anyone?) But I don't think there is likely to be an outspoken and authentic expert from inside China also inside the (Slashdot) house.

Personal disclaimers needed? Lately most of my AI games of the non-fun type have involved Claude, but Gemini keeps sticking it's remarkably unintelligent nose into my business to the point where I've become much more tolerant of Bing than I used to be. More broadly, there used to be a time when I would have high confidence of seeing useful discussions on Slashdot with some known experts who were probably the real people to boot (in at least two senses of "real"), but these days Slashdot has also been infected with the lack-of-trust virus. Another terminal case? I can't say, but I'm no longer surprised when one of the oldtimers keels over. Bash.org had a great collection of jokes...

Comment Ok. (Score 4, Interesting) 90

So you're telling Claude something vague and washy, then Claude invents a prompt that might vaguely possibly be somehow related to what you want along with a drink that is almost but not entirely quite unlike tea. Claude then recurses through this until it has a Celtic knot so intricate that it has its own Hausdorff dimension. What burps out is a product that is completely useless and patented to the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation.

Slashdot Top Deals

COBOL is for morons. -- E.W. Dijkstra

Working...