Comment Re:Do like China (Score 1) 10
IIUC, that was a (large scale) experiment. Maybe it will work, but maintenance may be too expensive.
IIUC, that was a (large scale) experiment. Maybe it will work, but maintenance may be too expensive.
The proper response to being in an area where datacentres are crowding in is "lobby your elected officials to increase property taxes and not give out tax increment financing deals". Tax everything, and tax it well. They'll stop building new datacentres in your area, and the ones that are there will (unless they were given a long-term sweetheart deal beyond your already-low tax rates) start being cash cows for your area.
Sorry, but the moon has LOTS of real value. The far side, e.g., is an ideal place to set up a large radio-telescope. It's got lots of useful materials for building things for local use. It's missing a few things that we need, like air and water, so that problem needs to be handled. But it's got a low enough gravity that a "lunar launcher" is actually practical...at least probably.
Orbital velocity is "half-way to anywhere", but there isn't much there to build stuff out of.
All that said, I'm not really convinced that our technology is yet up to the job. There's considerably too much handwaving around the details, and it's not going to be cheap. This only makes sense as a part of a long-term project...and we've got a bad track record on those. (OTOH, I didn't watch the megalithic structures being built. Perhaps they were also built in surges.)
IIUC, there isn't enough water on the moon to pay for using it as rocket fuel. There are doubts that there's enough to sustain a lunar colony. Better have a backup plan for extracting it from rocks. (This can be done, with many kinds of rock, but it's not cheap.)
Of course, we don't really know what the subsurface is like. There could be lots of water. But that's not the way to bet. A better source is probably the asteroids beyond the frost line. That requires technology than we don't have yet, but probably not anything that fancy. The problem is surviving until the basics get set up. (This, of course, assumes we don't waste the minimal resources that are currently "almost available".)
Hello fellow Frame owner.
I bought a Frame 65 just because of how beautiful the display was in Art Mode, and I want pretty art in my house for the 90% of the time the TV would otherwise be off.
I use the "Art Mode", but only with my own sideloaded content.
One thing that stinks is that sideloaded art doesn't support the full Art mode experience; specifically no Metadata. I seeded the display with lots of public domain images of classical and romantic european art (my taste - and why I never considered a paid art mode subscription), and I'm not cultured enough yet to just remember what all of it is. So I wish I could get the tv to show metadata sidecars for my custom images.
The Samsung firmware is garbage. I hate it whenever I accidentally hit the remote button for voice assist or AI assist or any of that garbage.
But the way the display looks when showing paintings is too good to pass up. If i could get a firmware that took out home screen nonsense and disabled 80% of what the TV did, but added metadata display for sideloaded images... it would be perfect.
Why is Palmer Luckey a "creep"?
Are you a TikTok girl or something?
Have you actually looked into his relationship habits?
He is a huge anime and retro video game nut. He married a cosplayer. (He did a little cosplay himself). They've been married since 2019 and have a kid together.
He won at life, basically.
We should really be building operating systems with more process isolation and clear permissions systems for which apps can interact with which other apps in which ways. There's elements of this in Android, and in capabilities systems like selinux, but the more powerful they get the harder they are to use. This is inevitable, but a lot more can still be done to make this kind of functionality accessible to users.
Additionally, some portions of the wikis were still built with Python 2. Python 2 reached end of life on January 1, 2020, and no longer receives upstream security fixes.
Not even Python could keep up with having to update from Python 2 to Python 3.
They’ve spun a serious architectural and containment failure into a marketing triumph. Give a swarm of autonomous agents vast compute and web access, and the outcome isn't an eerie glimpse of emerging superintelligence—it’s just predictable, sloppy engineering dressed up as the first glimpse of an AI-driven economic singularity.
The spin makes sense when you look at management incentives: live like a king off of a speculative bubble. For their part, AI investors react to stories of the technology's apocalyptic potential the way a junkie reacts to warnings of fentanyl's potency: gimme some. Their game: to apply "move fast and break things" mantra to the economy as a whole, by obsoleting humans.
If the investors can own an AGI, the distinction between those who can do things and those who can't becomes irrelevant. The only distinction that would matter is between people who collect rent on the technology, and those who must pay that rent to live. AGI would destroy society as we know it, and whatever replaces it would be up for grabs — with people who own the technology dictating whatever follows. That's why they're spending so much money to build a post-scarcity economy. A post-scarcity economy is not necessarily an egalitarian one.
I don't think that scenario will actually happen: investors are projecting the immediate aftermath of a major advance in AI technology into something that can be transformed by brute force scaling into AGI. Remember: investors loved Theranos too — so much for the rational investment market.
But AI doesn't have to reach AGI to cause serious harm. The technology only needs to be ubiquitous, too behaviorally complex to predict, and too deeply integrated into everything we do. When it starts breaking things, the plan is for us to be too structurally dependent on AI to rein it in.
Really, you don't see any difference between Elon Musk and, say, John Stankey? Is John Stankey actively transforming the US into an autocratic fascist-adjacent state?
Would you buy from a company called Plantations Inc which proudly advertises that all of its products are made by daily-whipped slaves? Are there no limits to how self-focused you are in your consumption?
It's one thing to say "this particular issue isn't mine, so I'm only going to think amount myself". It's an entirely different issue to have no moral bounds.
This headline sounds like something you'd hear coming from a news report on a TV in the background near the start of a horror movie.
I think what people are finding dubious is the "plausible intended use".
Could be a touch screen.
Actually, any controller would work. With sufficient computation it could use a voice controller.
Arguably, we started wearing machines with the advent of the smartphone
Pocket watch.
so I think a case could be made that we're already serving machines to some extent.
Time to start work! Eight o'clock, on the dot!
"Don't drop acid, take it pass-fail!" -- Bryan Michael Wendt