kulahan

It still sucks for all involved, and it's a shame there's not a better solution here. It's gotta be so frustrating for the folks at PBS to keep getting hit like this.

What’s happening is people are realizing how bad current rights for digital goods currently are, and are revolting at this obviously related scenario.

What people don’t realize is that physical != ownership. I remember wanting to pop The Dark Knight on Blu-ray into my ps4 for a date night… except the license on the disc expired, so I had to call WB for a new one??? Go figure.

Still, it’s fine if people react this way. If nothing else, it sends a message to lawmakers about priorities.

Thank you very much! Lots of reading to do today :3

Even easier if you reverse sear. Put it in the oven at 275 for like 25 minutes. Then put it in the hottest pan you can muster for like 45 seconds per side.

No need to bring it up to room temp. No need to let it rest after. No need to do anything except those two steps. It’s recommended for 2” thick steaks, and you can go under by half an inch easily, but this can be a little rough on very thin steaks.

I’ve heard there’s misinformation regarding water use. As far as I’ve heard, these data centers use quite a bit. I imagine they just use them for cooking and spit it back out warmer (though if we’re going to do that, I’d prefer we do it cooling a nuclear power plant, personally…)

Is this not accurate? Are there any good resources that aren’t like… these companies being super honest about how super good they are?

I know you’re joking, but unironically this might be untrue. One catalyst might be something only found in cities!

Granted, you could always replace the city with the catalyst of course :P

The point is that LLMs are doing human-ish things on their own, and that's what the value in them is, so OP is bringing attention to the fact that the tradeoff is "thinks dynamically, sometimes makes mistakes". Computers have never been built to think dynamically before.

Also kids...?

Don’t feel bad for them. It’s not something to feel bad about. We pay taxes specifically for instances including when something goes wrong.

Feel mad if this is a pattern and the citizens don’t do anything about it.

Not done growing until 26. The law says you’re an adult at 18, but that’s not even a little true. 18 year olds are children.

Y-yeah, that’s my point. The fact that there are no batteries means that instead of considering how it operates with a dirty battery (the only other option here), we consider how it works without any reliability.

Of course wind is green. It’s one of the simplest techs out there. It’s just mostly worthless if you don’t live in a wind tunnel. Even then, it’s unreliable. At best, as I said, this is a funsie project so Minnesota doesn’t have to buy from, say, Texas. I don’t think Minnesota is avoiding any international conflicts here, but maybe I’ve missed something. How would an unreliable fertilizer station get you away from conflicts anyways? “Well Tuesday was windy so we didn’t need to go to war for it, but today it’s dead so let’s bomb Iran” lol.

If you think the strait of Hormuz conflict is some reason for every nation to leave behind globalism, I don’t think you understand the whole idea behind globalism. It’s not that there will never be issues. It’s that we face them together.

> You seem to be quite keen to keep making the false dichotomy that a project can be either "economically viable with fossil fuel inputs" or "just for fun", but that is obviously not true for research projects.

Buddy, they literally built a factory that does not work without one of the dirtiest technologies we can build (batteries), which are still incredibly primitive in general, and which like… 9 industries are banking on a magical breakthrough in the next ten years. It’s definitely for funsies.

It’s almost exclusively true for research projects. 99.9% of them, including this, are purely for funsies. Nobody is gonna build a million of these. Nobody is going to rely on these. Maybe some nation will build a couple as a fun project, but if you’re trying to reduce your reliance on other nations (why?? The whole point of the global economy is not to produce everything at home, it’s to trade what you’ve got for what you need, and we already have more than enough supplies to grow enough food for all with plenty of surplus) for a very specific fertilizer input, a factory with variable inputs and outputs that you don’t actively control is a fun project at best and worthless at worst.

Of all the green energies, wind is by far the most baffling to try and expand. Solar at least predictably gets a Sun for half of every day, clouds notwithstanding, and people don’t generally farm at night.

Right, and if you read the first paragraph, you’d see it’s meant to increase and decrease power consumption based on demand.

How are they gonna turn up the damn wind, WJW? Is this a plant that shuts down every time there’s a calm day? Is it a plant for funsies or meant to be a reliable station? Either this is a gigantic art project, or it has hydrocarbon inputs for running on days when the wind is calm.

It doesn't have to be modern to be a miracle. The steam engine is one, too! I think this is still true of FFCS rockets, but maybe we're just wondering at different things in this world :)

It's talking about the economic inputs required to create a unit of energy. Literally all you have to fathom is "can we add up what it takes to make a watt of energy from coal, vs. from solar power vs. some other plant, amortized over the lifetime of said plant?"

I thought the same thing, but actually, no. Fossil fuel plants are expensive to run. "That they are already here" is an argument for plants which are more advanced and thus, much more expensive to build, but much cheaper to maintain.

Wrong. Natural gas is the most common catalyst, but plenty of plants use oil, coal, and other hydrocarbons.

A quick refresher: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haber_process#Process

It’s mot powered with fossil fuels. It uses fossil fuels as an ingredient.

No they don’t. They remain subsidized. Solar surpassed fossil fuels in efficiency ages ago, and I don’t even LIKE solar. Fossil fuels have no redeeming qualities in the major energy sectors anymore, aside from ONE: the plants are VERY cheap to build.

Imagine being a recruiter, seeing someone genuinely interested in the position (or at least willing to put in the effort to make it seem that way), and getting annoyed rather than hyped. You in the wrong line of work, brother.

There’s nothing logical about trying to make non-oxidizing metal that can handle thousands of degrees of temperature, hundreds of bars of pressure, and a nearly pure-oxygen environment? The US essentially made fun of the Soviets for even trying. If you think it’s logical, you don’t understand the tech at all. It’s a borderline miracle, let alone simply “logical”.

Literal rocket scientists spent decades and careers saying it was a waste of time, and random people with zero expertise try to downplay it. I’ll never understand being THIS cocky is a subject one has clearly never touched.

I can’t imagine how inefficient a country would be if they tamped down all their magical thinking. FFCS, SMILE, and EUVL are all magical thinking if you ask me. Some of the craziest things humans have ever conceived of.

What an unreasonably complex device to imply you’re going to make 50,000 copies of and ship out to every border agent in the nation after telling them every SINGLE flash drive crossing the border MUST be scanned. That’s so much wasted time, energy, and money. Are you building a similar device for SD cards? HDDs? SSDs? External drives? You’re going to build a database of exact charge draws for every device in existence which happens to have some form of storage on it?

Fucking up every single import and traveler on the off-chance one in seven billion scans detects one of these devices and, further, carries some data the US cares enough about to chase down to this degree?

No. Nope. Nuh uh. Insanely unreasonable. You will get ONE at a station, which you only bother to use if you can convince your $12/hr employee to even give a shit. Literally an insane proposition.

Doubt this will change the calculus much. Why would I care if GPT puts an ad for medicine in the bottom of a message during a medical conversation? I’d pay big bucks to get medicine without having to talk to a doctor anyways. It’s such a useless part of the process so often.

“Hey doc I need $antidepressentOrWhatever. Been on it for years. Works great.”

“You got it dude.”

Literally every single doctor I’ve ever talked to has this exact same waste of time conversation because they’re too lazy to make it go away.

And the alternative is… an ad for the thing in asking about? For a conversation I had at home, the instant I needed it? What a beautiful tradeoff.

Edit: and this is before even getting into the fact that I get better, more complete advice. Medicine I take, I’ve discovered, has a direct link to another problem I’ve brought up with doctors many times. Never once mentioned to me. Quick Google shows it’s most likely the actual issue. Can’t wait to spend $50 to have a doctor admit he had no idea because he was just prescribing what I told him to without actually applying any of his medical knowledge or training, as is tradition.

I would kill myself and the patent holder before considering paying for ads

lol, a big part of security is being smart enough to never challenge the bored…

It sucks you’re the only person on earth who is altruistic enough for this thing that would definitely work but you’re choosing not to enact it despite it being so easy it’s a simple choice.

Because your statement sure leaves exactly zero room for anything else. Kind of a stupid comment at the end of the day. Either that, or you’re such an incredible jerk that you’re specifically choosing not to make these very easy changes that would save the world.

>Major political issue, I suppose

Can’t believe nobody noticed this was a joke

Why advertise you agree with something objectively wrong lmao

I’m not sure I understand your point. These things remain true regardless of whether or not you find ways to improve your process. Do we just… not try to improve because there is noise to sift through?