Exactly. Especially as it seems that the AI companies are selling their tokens at below cost. Small-scale installations for local models may make sense for individuals who want to keep their data isolated, but they do not make economic sense for companies.

The automative vs. augmentive distinction that AI companies and the ownership class want you to believe in is nonsense meant to keep the working class calm as their job opportunities dwindle away. The only difference between them is a quantity threshold. Augmentive means multiplying the number of jobs available by a number greater than zero but less than one (as fewer people can do the same work), automative means multiplying the number of jobs available by zero. Both mean jobs are lost, the only difference is how many remain.

His opinion seemed clearly explained and well reasoned. As opposed to your comment...

We should have the tools. I'm not arguing that we should go back to agrarian lifestyles. But somehow we as a society should find a way to not permit wanton waste of resources in the name of cheap, fleeting entertainment.

The issue is that those videos are being created en masse. People would simply not create them in the first place. Making resources so easily available that people waste them without thinking is the reason capitalism has turned our society into a planet destroying machine and called it "quality of life". Nobody's quality of life is improved by the existence of videos of fake cats doing improbable things, yet we've now invested a civilization worth of resources into creating them. It's the broken window fallacy, writ so large that it's unrecognizable.

Problem is people aren't just querying. They're saying "generate a video of a cat riding a shark", which uses a LOT of inference and compute.

But then you would not have learned the value of a 10 second Google search before asking a question with an extremely easy to find answer.

a) I don't believe you. You're lying and there's nothing you can say that will change my mind. I live in Australia where I probably drive to a weekend dinner a distance that you call a "road trip". The number of people here who have done 800+km in a day is vanishingly small. 800km is NOT 8 hours. It'll be around 10 at a minimum even if you're on highway the whole time. There's pee stops. There's traffic and animal slow downs. There's leg stretching and snacking. The fact that you think 800km can be done in 8 hours in any setting other than a controlled speed run tells me that you've probably never driven long distance, ever.

b) If you drive 8 hours with your wife in the car without taking any rest stops, then you are both irresponsible adults. Which tracks with the rest of what you say here.

c) Because making car decisions based on something you do once or twice in your lifetime is stupid. Which tracks with the rest of what you're saying here.

d) Can't afford it? Then go on vacation closer. Driving 2% of the Earth's equatorial circumference because you want a vacay is not a fundamental right you spoiled brat. Get your highly educated kids to chip in for a better vehicle, seeing as you raised them so well.

I hurl insults because I feel it's completely justified. And given the string of factual inaccuracies throughout your post, I doubt you specifically raised kids to go into research fields to help the environment. If you had anywhere NEAR that level of prescience and foresight, you would not think along the lines of "I've earned the right to pollute for no good reason".

a) 800km in a day is beyond being a rare edge case. The % of the population that has ever done, or will ever do, 800km in a single day would be below 1%.
b) In 800km of driving, you will take more than 45 minutes worth of breaks anyway. You just need to use your brain a little and plan it to stop at a charging station. Although, if you're American, I do understand that brain use is quite the ask.
c) There are now EVs capable of going 800km in a single charge, if you truly are doing 800km in a day with any degree of regularity (which I highly doubt)
d) Even if you do wait a bit more, that small price is worth it for a planet we can live on, you childish, stupid, self-centered, short sighted sack of dumb horseshit.

This could be my next phone but has two big problems I see immediately. No earpiece so you can't, you know, hold it up to your ear and make calls like on a normal phone, you either need to have a bluetooth earpiece at all times or use speakerphone. The other thing I don't like is the Blackberry-like form factor. Nothing beats or comes close to the landscape slider layout. That said if it's open-source hardware I could at least potentially mod up a landscape slider version with an earpiece.

EVs are now a direct replacement for ALL consumer use cases. If you need to tow your shitty trailer home from London to Prague twice a week then bad luck. Charging stations are common enough now.

You don't live in a country that has been under continual full bore economic, propaganda and terrorist attack by the biggest economy and most expensive military/intel organizations on the planet for half a century. Like Cuba, the fact that the country is still intact, unified, and free is a huge testament to its people and its government. You may not like their culture or their government, but it works for them and we have no right to force anything different on them.

a bad mod

My understanding of the idea behind common core math is that their goal was exactly that students should develop an understanding of math that would allow them to easily spot all the different ways they could do such calculations easily. I think the problem was that a lot of their methods come from people who understand the concepts already and think that their methods are nicely illustrative of the concepts, but who don't grasp that they only illustrate the concepts if you already actually know what's behind them. Then you end up with the reality with the boxes, counting, colours, etc. where the actual students mind is reeling and they're saying to themselves "what the hell is going on here, why are we doing this!" even more than with the way it was previously taught. It's even worse when they expect the student to "show their work" with by drawing the boxes, ribbons, whatever for themselves. That's just adding 40%+ to the time of each problem when the student isn't thinking about math at all, they're drawing the same boring thing over and over on autopilot. It's not like that kind of thing is entirely new of course. I mean, thinking back, I wish I'd had a unit circle stamp and a stamp pad. Because, seriously, what was the point of drawing it over and over and over? Once you'd done it a few times, it was just a waste of time to draw it yourself. So, basically common core took that sort of thing and magnified it.

Others have noted that the article wasn't claiming that AI is the reason that math skills are atrophying. Also, it seems to be all in how you use it. The AI has gotten mostly good enough at this point that it can be a pretty good math tutor. I mean, it's maybe more like studying with a friend who understands the material pretty well, but still misunderstands some things about the questions. But, it's a friend with infinite patience. For some students, it will help them learn far better than a teacher or math tutor leaning down their neck. Of course, that's not going to be the same for all students. They still have to want to understand the material.