Gagarin1917

I thought this was a new twist on the popular online game

The point is that they’d have to be picked up and retrieved at all, even from Perseverance.

That alone is a separate multibillion dollar program just to do that.

The point is that they’d have to be picked up and retrieved at all, even from Perseverance.

That alone is a separate multibillion dollar program just to do that.

Also they’re no where near each other. These Chinese rover cannot get there.

Also also, if China were to create a new mission to collect them, they would see their costs balloon to unsustainable levels as well, as the issue is how the mission is designed. The samples are all over the place and would need a rover specifically designed to collect them and return them to a launcher.

The US Mars sample return project was always half baked in the hopes that doing something would garner funding for the rest of the mission.

Yeah there are MAJOR reasons that a huge amount of Chinese scientists immigrate to the US every year, but almost no US scientists immigrate to China.

These are smart people, they’re not going to make major life decisions based on simplistic takes from political opportunists.

This doesn’t actually represent an American decline in space exploration, though.

The NASA/ESA Mars sample return was poorly designed, they basically attached a half baked idea to the Perseverance mission in the hopes that having the mission “underway” would make it easier to fund the rest of the mission. That meant Perseverance was just putting things in tubes and leaving them sealed on the ground at random places around Mars. So that meant they would need to devise another system to go collect them, another system to store and launch them, and another system to return them to Earth. That’s a ridiculous process. The costs exploded, the gambit failed.

China’s was much better planned, having the rover and launch vehicle land together, fully funded from the beginning. However, it’s also much simpler, there’s no picking and choosing what to sample from a wide area, it’s just whatever is available to the lander wherever it happens to land.

And this would not have been the only future mission to deep space. The US is going to land a fleet of drones on Mars. They’re launching a nuclear powered drone to Titan.

The US has led the world in reusable rocket development, satellite constellations, and crewed LEO operations.

The big picture is clear. This one mission doesn’t really say much about the space program in general.

I mean they’re similar because it’s the same thing happening… light not being able to reach us.

I’m not talking about micromanaging, I’m talking about relaying the information to the actual CEO (Steve Balmer I believe?) and ensuring they achieve the goals.

If the President of the board has an issue with how the company is fundamentally operating, they go to the CEO. If the CEO doesn’t understand or doesn’t prioritize the concerns of the board, then they get replaced.

He’s may not have been the CEO… but he was the boss of the CEO and represented all the individual owners of the company.

A lot of self described artists seem to believe that the artist is the entire value of works of art. At least, that’s what they’ve claimed since AI hit the scene. I can’t tell if they’ve always felt that way or if they adopted it in order to discredit the use of AI - “if it has no artist then it has no value.”

No, no, I get that the general deal was public information. I’m not doubting that Anthropic partnered with SpaxeXAI for additional computer. I said as much in my original comment.

What I’m doubting is your claim that SpaceXAI is giving them a 12 billion dollar discount. That link does not say anywhere that SpaceXAI is giving them an 80% discount after charging them $15 billion. That doesn’t make any sense.

I’m not sure what you’re referencing, I can’t find any source for this.

Why would they offer an 80% discount? Hardware is the limiting factor for many AI companies.

I thought SpaceXAI was making like $25 billion a year renting out hardware now?

What? What are you talking about?

I’m clearly likening it to the subject of this thread: using government to create protectionist policies.

100% tariffs on Chinese EVs is a protectionist policy by Biden. Banning Chinese AI would be a protectionist policy from Trump.

Where did you get confused?

> Maybe... maybe... if this were a discussion about only his protectionism on Chinese tech, yea, maybe you have a point.

That is the discussion though…

Too many people here are acting like Trump is the only one who would do this. It’s very likely any President would do the same. The Biden EV tariffs were just one example.

I mean, both sides do implement protectionist laws.

Did we already forget about Biden raising tariffs on Chinese EVs to protect the auto industry & unions?

I’m not sure you’re looking at things quite fairly.

I don’t think there’s much reason to believe a Democrat or a different Republican would be less likely to implement protectionist laws. That’s kind of a reoccurring problem.

Remember when Biden increased tariffs on Chinese EVs because they threatened American auto companies and unions?

Any models that can understand thick accents better than I can?

Anytime I’m talking to an Indian on the other end, I have to have them repeat everything 2 or 3 times.

If you’re worried about this why are you using a third party AI in the first place?

Running any query in Claude or Codex could result in the AI reading/uploading any file in your codebase.

Individual firms can cut jobs while the overall economy sees more of that job pop up. That’s what happens when individuals become more efficient, new projects become more economical and more companies end up requiring these jobs.

>You seem to think that non programmers don't ask LLMs to program for them.

Because they largely do not. Are you actually under the impression that the average person is using chatbots to program? That’s wayyy off.

>Maybe that's why you're comfortable here thinking you're definitely will keep being in demand.

I’ve made no such claim, this a complete non-sequitur.

>Believe me they do ask an LLM to write for them various tools and bots and what LLM writes can in turn consume tokens like crazy be agentic or whatever the latest hype word is.

The average person does not do this. Come on, dude.

>even without that uploading a resume is not "write emails based on a number of docs and spreadsheets and other emails and Slack chats plus some websites and iterate on it multiple times".

It’s much closer to the average usage. All of that is still far less than agentic coding.

>LLM doesn't think

You don’t realize I’m referring to the process of generating a ton of text in an attempt to better address the request - a process that these LLM companies call “thinking”? Are you out of the loop or are you taking some kind of pointless stand here?

>yeh people never ever ask LLMs to write emails based on a number of docs and spreadsheets and other emails and Slack chats plus some websites and definitely won't iterate on it multiple times...

A worker might have one or two of those large requests a day. That stop doesn’t come close to agentic AI token usage. I’ve been applying for jobs daily, uploading both my resume and the job posting upwards of 6-7 times per day to these chatbots. I still never hit the free limit.

Agentic AI coding obviously uses far, far more. This really shouldn’t be surprising.

That’s not true. The different use cases of LLMs objectively use different amounts of tokens. AI coding agents can parse half a dozen or more files on each request, plus use a ton for thinking.

Writing an email barely uses any in comparison.

It doesn’t matter what “most people” are, coding agents use an obscene amount of tokens, literally millions per day. Every request to an agent needs to parse at least several different documents/files.

No not at all

But why if that costing anyone money? You can generate like 50 of that kind of thing using various chatbots throughout your day.

You don’t need a pro account for emails.

I’m not saying “It’s crazy to ever write emails with AI.”

I’m saying it shouldn’t hardly cost any money, emails are not token intensive and most people could likely use the free version of chatbots just fine.

But surely the free version of any of the chatbots is enough to achieve that, right? You don’t need a Pro subscription for that.

>And in coding specifically, the speedup is real and comes with its own bill.

Oh so this article isn’t really about where AI spending is actually happening.

I HOPE people aren’t spending money on AI writing emails. That’s definitely not worth it.

Companies are spending the most on coding tools, not email writing. That’s the main value proposition right now.

It also doesn’t get into media generation and industries that use video or music.

It’s just a really narrow look at probably the worst use case for AI. Useless.

What website/service actually uses that?