Ahh, thanks... was not aware of that term/phenomenon, though it makes sense.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Summer loads typically peak mid-day and follow solar generation closely... batteries help make managing supply and demand easier, but huge capacity isn't necessarily needed or helpful.

By contrast, it's winter loads that experience the morning/evening "double peak". That's where these large capacities come into play... the sun directly warms houses during the middle of the day (cutting the need for heating) and the batteries soak up excess dollar generation, which then gets spent as the sun sets and in the morning hours the next day.

We had a creeping at work put cameras under women's desks aimed to catch up-skirts. Deploying the cameras ahead of time doesn't lessen the offense. "Passive" stalking an entire population is a grave threat to our collective well-being.

This. Hoping we can control superintelligent AI when we have no experience controlling superintelligent AIs is like hoping you can invent automobiles and never ever have any wreck, not even once. Because if you wreck--if your super AI escapes long enough to establish itself--then it's game over for humanity.

I agree, but also: open source isn't really a viable concept for frontier AI models. You can't release the training data because it undoubtedly contains unsavory, politically-misaligned, copyrighted, and illegal content: you'd drown in p.r. and legal problems. And on the recipient side, nobody can afford billions of dollars of GPUs to make their own fork.

Let's wait until the last possible second to talk about preventing a world-ending catastrophe. What could possibly go wrong?

No, actually. The amount raised so far is $1.2 million. And the money hours to her parents for (purportedly) the living expenses they have incurred in relocating to Massachusetts to attend the legal proceedings, not to Lindsay herself.

This whole thing is being spun as if liberal women support the atrocious death of those three kids. They don't. Don't fall for rage bait.

How do you know? Until last year, we humans were the only creatures capable of high-level reasoning to ever exist on this planet. Something new is being created, something that is potentially capable of self-improving and becoming far smarter than us. We should treat it seriously because--once an AI gets sufficiently smart and resourceful--we won't be able to stop it.

He did think... his post laid out a plausible chain of consequences stemming from the legislation. Maybe it's right or maybe it's wrong, but he added something to the conversation instead of resorting to name-calling.

The winning 2016 candidate lost the popular vote.

... to blame store employees instead of technology or the management decision to knowingly deploy a flawed technology.

You'll start to see such "accountability sinks" a lot whenever a company needs to weasle out of legal and PR situations caused by their AI deployments.

Space is cheap compared to war and corruption.

He's long-winded, ideological, and sort of off-topic, but he's not necessarily wrong.

Also, the very concept of remote proctoring is a foolish dream. The kids are going to outsmart you... some of them anyways, and then they'll tell their friends how they did it.

No real worry about that: the usual crowd is greasing palms and heavily funding opposition to candidates who oppose AI or want to regulate it.