Google to provide Pentagon with AI agents
bloomberg.com
bloomberg.com
Not surprisingly companies are willing to get into bed with more and more questionable use cases if it helps show some desperately needed AI adoption revenue.
Companies are getting desperate to show AI adoption as right now the numbers just don’t add up.
Just because you’re struggling to get raw materials for your business doesn’t make it a good business. Without strong enterprise adoption ASAP (which is what’s seriously suffering) things are going to hit the fan real quick.
> While AI training is often the most intense and expensive process for a single model, the majority of total AI compute usage (approximately 90%) is used for inference.
> Here is the breakdown of why this is the case: > Inference as High-Volume
> Activity: Inference occurs every time a user interacts with an AI model (e.g., asking ChatGPT a question, using image recognition, or generating code). While a model is trained once (or updated infrequently), it runs millions or billions of inferences continuously.
> Cost Scaling: Training is a massive, one-time upfront cost, while inference is an ongoing, daily operational cost. As the number of AI users grows, the demand for inference compute scales faster than the need for training new, large models.
> The Shift to Efficiency: While early AI hype focused on the immense compute needed for training, the industry has shifted toward making inference cheaper and faster through specialized hardware and techniques like optimization, quantization, and small language models (SLMs).
https://share.google/aimode/v3Y9P3rYIx1oj9VI2
And I finally figured out how to get links to answers instead of just inlining the content as before. Anyways, there it is. We live in a time where questions like "Does inference or training use more compute?" can be answered quickly by just pasting it into a search box.
Do you sincerely believe this? This claim seems as wild as those vastly popular podcasters who constantly claim they're being "silenced".
This is further compounded by the fact the DOD, and the administration at large, is headed by some of the most incompetent and morally bankrupt individuals imaginable. I wouldn't trust Hegseth to change a goddamn light bulb, let alone run the DOD.
I do think those who bully those who defend the US online are the morally bankrupt ones.
Google doesn't need to do anything to make any other numbers work.
Gemini 3.1 pro is really good; Meta just signed a deal with Google for their TPUs.
Nano Banana 2 Pro is alsy very good.
OpenAI numbers might not add up, Antrophic might burn through cash, but not google.
And it doesn't matter anyway because as long as google can afford it, Microsoft HAS TO do this too and Microsoft also can afford it. The same with Amazon.
Microsoft invests in OpenAI and Amazon invests in Antrophic.
Given Anthropic is also funded by them, either they are desperate to not lose or they really don't think Anthropic has a moat.
Even a company like Amazon hasn't just billions on a bank account.
They make enough profit to easily afford this.
Its easier to get a loan instead of getting a lump sump through other means.
And their core business is super stable even with AI.
So the only real risk is increasing operational costs but if they pay of the investment, they literlay could just stop the hardware from running and reduce the operational cost if there is no demand
But not all companies as we have seen over the last week or so.
Irregardless, all companies doing so will have to balance the ethics of their choices against the public perception of their company as all of us are free to make choices that align with our own personal ethics.
(In short, they don't get to hide behind "everyone else is doing it".)
I think I'd be more annoyed if my government weren't using tools to make BS work more efficient.
So the problem is filling out forms is too onerous, but rather than fix the process, create a device that fills the form with slop and then another device that approves or rejects the slop form.
I could have sworn I signed up for the other future-the one without quite this much stupid.
In house IT is going to be huge in a couple of years sorting out this mess. I would have never guessed the future would be all custom Excel spreadsheets, but instead of Excel just random code in random languages with random data stores.
No mistakes,
Thanks.
...is as true now as ever.
The US is not perfect, but this disparagement of the US for the benefit of the Islamic Republic is disgusting. As is the online bullying of people who stand up for the US.
For example:
- What if the country asked you to develop technology to track and hack journalists or political rivals the administration doesn't like?
- What if the country asked you to develop chemical weapons? Is it different if the weapons would be used on their own population or only on external "enemies"?
- What if the country asked you to personally assassinate a civilian of another country? What if they asked you to create a program that would do that? What if they asked you to simply create a list of targets, and you knew they'd be assassinated?
- What if the country asked you to build something in an unsafe way that you're pretty certain will cause harm to people?
- What if the country asked you to make a public statement lying about the purpose behind what you're building?
When is the point we see that boycotting these companies that are helping kill, lets say 100 little girls with a tomahawk missiles, is the very least we can do?
Gemini: "You're absolutely right! That's my bad. Here's the actual missile launch target."
Also the whole internet started as a military project. The big reason, especially when it comes to Silicon Valley's tech is that people just don't want it until they can see what it does.
It wouldn't be good though.
Do you support the current Iran war and the way its handled?
Opposition and critisism (normally done by the independent press and the party not in power) is there to align. With trump you have 'deals' of rich people doing other rich people favours. They do not care about human lives
"Death to America" wasn't a action, it was a reaction.
But its great we can stop discussing this anyway if you see war as a black/white thing.
9/11 was one reaction of the middle east to americas behaviour and it will be interesting to see what terrorism will happen in the USA after this war.
> 9/11 was one reaction of the middle east to americas behaviour and it will be interesting to see what terrorism will happen in the USA after this war.
That your simple view of this war doesn't align with my more broader view of the war?
But to be very very clear: fu USA. I assumed, as a young perosn that we germany and USA were allies (you know ww2 etc.) and then I learned how USA sees itself as the world police.
And how the USA controls mmilitary stations around the world, how the USA CIA was responsible for the drug lords in Mexico ,how the USA overthrew Iran and replaced it with a USA friendly person on purpose.
How the FBI? or CIA created the Una-bomber.
How the USA threw nuclear weapons onto Japan (i was there, i saw what that did).
And now how the USA throws a tantrum by voting in the most narcisistic president in the world and just fucks over the world.
Feel free to stand with America, i do not. I do not stand with Iran either though and especially not with Israel.
Will I be the only one concerned that amplifying bullshit might run contrary to the mission of the national defense
To them, this is just another Tuesday.
It's possible to use just one word for it but I don't want to get banned
Let's see if anyone here has the guts to even switch away from GCP, scratch that can folks even move away from Apple(Apple pays for Gemini too) and Android?
I do think OpenAI deserves the boycott but people talking about Anthropic as they were taking some kind of ethical stand when it was just ego tripping for everyone involved is insane.