Thanks for the comment but then commenting to the GP (@Hellojimbo) that sure Elon might hate Demis
But nobody denies a 920M$ per deal for an unprofitable company's like SpaceX at this point, last line to somehow become profitable after this deal.
The scale at this money & influence operates, although I feel like people project to the general public that they lean a particular side and sometimes they do but what they lean the most is towards money and whatever response is the most convenient for them at that time.
Rossman sometimes makes good points, but he's also very prone to generating controversial content (intentionally), so as always, practice some level of skepticism.
Rossman is only controversial if you don't think people are entitled to privacy and consumers aren't entitled to the entirety of the products they purchase.
His talks seem pretty clear cut to me. Can you list some examples?
"Flock is bad" is not a controversial statement. "Mandatory age verification tech lobbied for by Meta is bad" is not a controversial statement. "Open source 3D printing should be defended from billionaires" is not a controversial statement.
Do you run it at 20V or USB 5V? I ask because I found it heated up very slowly at 5V (and had trouble maintaining high heat), while once I got a nice USB PD power supply, it worked very well.
It replaced my weller almost instantly (the weller just inserts heat insert nuts now).
20v everywhere plus I made up a high power DC power cord with a barrel connector. My company’s marketing department has really nice USB-C power bricks emblazoned with our logo. I also invested in a biggish Anker battery with full USB-PD support.
dekhn's 12th law (amended): any discussion of how AI and brains work will devolve into several threads about the nature of the subjective human experience, solipsism, whether humans are machines, and whether a feedforward network trained by backpropagation can be conscious.
12th law, corollary: nothing of value will come from these threads
Yeah, pretty sure the vast majority of people in general doesn't understand what "consciousness" or "subjective experience" even mean or what the brain does. Or it's just me and I'm projecting my thoughts onto others. I studied some philosophy, so I know that some philosophers are preoccupied with "existence" and the mind and "consciousness". However, I don't quite understand what these words even mean. So who am I to judge whether LLMs have consciousness? I don't even know what consciousness IS! Do other people know? I'm not sure.
When I worked there a few years ago, if you made a meme that made anybody unhappy, there was a team in corporate that woudl threaten your job to make you delete it.
I reached my own productivity limit on several projects (in my case, I'm building a fully automated microscope that uses realtime computer vision to solve a number of longstanding problems with microscopes). As much as I'd want to write the code for it, I hit a wall when it came to debugging some particularly tricky issues- either I couldn't do it, or the time investment was too high.
I use Gemini/ChatGPT/Claude to do that work and it unblocked the enjoyable parts of the project while taking care of the tedium.
I also find LLMs help me learn faster because they can often take a paper and turn it into working code, which I find to be a very slow process.
I remember when 32MB of RAM cost $375. I paid it anyway, even as a poor undergraduate, so I could avoid swapping while running g++, emacs, and X11 at the same time, on my cheap linux machine
Can you say with absolute certainty that sick animals and long term impacts on their health are not caused by data centers? Certainly we have long list of examples where industrial activity contaminated areas with little oversight and it did kill animals and cause long-term impacts on health. I think you're saying that data centers do not pollute in a way that would cause sick animals or long-term impacts on health, but I don't think that can be stated confidently.
So this might be controversial and I'm unable to phrase it better, but you can't always engage in good faith to address claims when the claimant themselves are incapable of engaging in good faith to make them.
I could be convinced on negative environmental impact of data centers in a few ways. I could believe there's additional strain on water purification infrastructure if the open loop cooling systems are using additives and creating additional volume of water that existing treatment plants weren't designed to handle. I could believe that additional power demand and on-site generators using fossil fuels could create pollution where it didn't exist before. I could believe that in a rush to build quicker, construction crews take shortcuts.
Basically all industrial activity on this planet creates waste that can harm people. That's why we create zones for it away from residences, and why land closer to it is cheaper.
This is all stuff you can engage with good faith. The problem is these are not the claims that the crazy people are making, and not the ones it sounds like the author of TFA is bothering to investigate. There's a large group of people that will believe "thing bad, thing hurt" with zero evidence besides vibes, and you can't meet with psychosis on shared ground.
As you wrote it, it really reads as "everybody who says datacenters have health impacts is a crackpot" but I think your intent was "some people who say datacenters have health impacts are crackpots".
Proteins are truly amazing. I've studied them for decades and they still manage to surprise; for example, i worked with protein structural prediction for decades and assumed that structure was necessary for function, but some proteins remain mostly unfolded and still carry out complex mechanistic tasks.
reply