What if nobody implemented it?
Then Microsoft and Apple among others would be fined per day until they implemented it; or perhaps even being held in contempt of court if the government sued them and won up to and including jail time for executives; or given the current regime, being designated a supply chain risk.
Even if the companies eventually prevail in court, most wouldn't want the hassle or being on the bad side of Orange Man.
There are sites I like and do not block ads because I want them to be around, and in the end they either need to paywall or run ads to stay in business.
But the company whose ad it is has already paid to be shown on the site, hasn't it? Why should they care whether I choose to block ads via my browser? I'm never going to click on any as anyway.
Before emissions controls, they'd try to disperse soot and ash over wide area to minimize the impact to individuals, but natural gas burns a lot cleaner than coal, and doesn't really produce soot or ash, so it's not really a concern.
The only thing that article says about it is that the local government did a study and concluded that it wasn't an environmental hazard.
Think about it this way: why would a gas turbine mounted on a trailer emit more pollution than a fixed facility? It's burning the same fuel, with the same emissions controls.
Ok, but we should still be able to add that to the grid. In reality, it is much easier and cheaper to build a 1GW power plant than it is to build a 1GW datacenter.
2GW is basically nothing. The entire grid is something like 1,200GW so you'd need to add a fraction of a percent to cover a very large data center. The fact that people claim this is beyond our capability is preposterous.
It uses exactly the amount of power I think it does, because I can read the specs and they say how much power these things use, which is not very much.
See, this is the kind of retarded bullshit you idiots say, and then you expect me to take you seriously.
Mobile generators don't produce any more pollution than regular power plants. It is common for businesses to install mobile generators so that they can operate them right away (I believe the law allows them to operate for 1 year) before they get permanent air permits for them. By the way, Xai does have stationary permits for them now, so even that deeply flawed information is out of date.
It is hilarious to see morons like you vacillate between claiming these companies are irresponsible for using the grid without paying for new generation, and complaining when they do add the grid capacity to cover their use. It couldn't be more obvious that it has triggered a knee-jerk anti-development instinct in your lizard brain and that you have not capacity whatsoever to consider these developments rationally.
All this anti-datacenter nonsense is entirely unfounded in reality, so you are just another one of the stupid voters I am talking about.
It sounds like a good way to tank the economy forever, but ok.
Actually, the concerns are not real either. These don't really use all that much power, and they don't use any water or pollute the environment at all to speak of. Adding capacity to the grid to power these data centers should be entirely trivial. It's not because of other dumb rules that other dumb voters have supported in the past. Any attempt to solve the problem by limiting new development is completely nonsensical.
If this passes it calls the whole concept of democracy into question.
If an LLM regurgitates your code verbatim (or really close so it could reasonably be considered a derivative work) and it's uncredited, then it's copyright infringement and also plagiarism.
Welcome to boggle - do you want instructions? D G G O O Y A N A D B T K I S P Enter words: >
