logancbrown

Why are you so mad about orbital data centers? Your language is full of hate and vitriol. Let people build things that other people say are impossible or infeasible, find out if they work, turn out they dont work, then make improvements. If someone proposed the combustion engine to you in 1700 Im sure you would reply the same negative way.

This argument sounds reminiscent of "this is not AGI/ASI". Arguing over definitions is arbitrary. This is an operational data-center that is processing data on TPUs. That alone qualifies as an orbital data center.

Are you moving the goalpost? There are other people in this thread right now that are stating exactly that running orbital GPUs in space will not physically be possible (heat limits, etc).

Genuine question: why are there so many people up-in-arms on orbital data centers? Like they have a personally vested interest in ensuring their opinions on failure are correct? There are many people on HN that despise it and say it will not and will never work, but here we are, they are flying them up to space and presumably, will start working soon.

This is the same as AWS's new quickSuite platform?

Residential contractors are typically not the same as commercial contractors. Simply for the fact that commercial charges 2x what residential does is one of those reasons. Not saying there is zero overlap, but the pools are not totally shared.

Amazon doesn't provide financial breakdowns between Ads & E-commerce fulfillment and inventory costs, so take the Wall Street article with a grain of salt.

This analogy really only works assuming that maintaining [insert company]'s institutional expertise requires N engineers to maintain individual lines of code manually.

This is already showing not to be true with AI. Institutional knowledge is not the same as knowing how to implement low-level software details. Even today, every company does not need engineers to remember git cli syntax by memory, how to write parsers for JSON, or write the large amount of boilerplate from scratch that is at every software company. Most company's already hire engineers who have zero experience in the existing code base, yet they are productive despite this lack of institutional knowledge. For a company to maintain institutional knowledge they may only need N/K engineers.

You can't imagine a singular person and reason who would want an improved Siri?

Obvious false analogy in your earlier argument.

Steal someone elses work, whose work was also AI generated . . .

SQL shall never die, in contrast, it shall grow in scope and utility

Also very silly prediction given this would dramatically lower the amount of models hosted on HuggingFace and move users elsewhere to platforms that do support quantized models (not what Nvidia wants).

Funny to think one of my favorite software projects this decade is basically "lets make it easy to host your own OLAP database".

Its possible no AI lab has any unique edge, and success is a combination of (a) having access to GPUs (b) having access to large amounts of data (c) know about the handful of techniques to build an LLM, of which nearly all are likely open source and documented in papers. So the cycle of growth is (a) and (b), get more GPUs and get more data and you have a better model.

The US doesn't need more oil, but if Iran were to cut off oil supply from the Persian Gulf it would make oil prices significantly more expensive by reducing total available worldwide supply. The US economy, for the better or worse of it, depends on cheap oil to supply energy for commerce and transportation, and if that becomes more expensive, people stop traveling, trucks stop shipping, energy stops being produced and millions of US jobs are at risk.

The whole "Death to America" and USA is the "Great Satan" make them a much more morally easy target given they have practically no ability to fight back.

It is true globally as well, but there are certainty anecdotes where confounding factors makes it not true like what you've highlighted with specific France Nuclear reactors.

We should be cognizant of the environmental impact of producing more energy, but it still remains true that making more energy means cheaper energy across the resources we have today.

Which metric do you disagree with presented on the site?

This is the case with all construction jobs. Its not unique to a data center.

>The same process is pricing regular people out of the energy they need to power their air conditioner during those heat waves and the technology it enables is pushing them out of the labor market and into poverty.

I don't see evidence this is true, and the critical mass of data centers is making electricity cheaper. Economies of scale -> more energy = bigger electric plants = cheaper energy.

https://netchoice.org/new-study-confirms-what-weve-been-sayi...

Making recording in public require a license is a very easy way to cut free speech and document wrong-doing of a system.

The large distribution of silo'ed law enforcement across the US is one of the driving reasons why it can be so hard to solve crimes (murder, vehicular theft, etc). Once any crime has the potential to cross state or even jurisdiction lines, dealing with the inner-bureaucracy of crossed enforcement agencies adds days to weeks to solving urgent crimes. A distributed system without consideration into how to coalesce the data together is no better of a solution vs what we have today.

People think this is causing issues for data collection for LLMs, but in reality it's not and there are several very trivial mechanisms to employ in data collection to bypass the "poison data" issue. The internet landscape was already poisoned with fake data, fringe conspiracies, and text before this Poison Fountain initiative.

Because the EPA called it the "2010/2015 PFOA Stewardship Program" not the "2010/2015 PFAS Stewardship Program" PFAS != PFOA

I think you mean PFOS and not PFAS, the relationship of cancers and health risks is linked to PFOS, but not PFAS in general at this time. PFOS in consumer-facing products were also majority phased out back in 2015.

Source for those interested

https://dnhkng.github.io/posts/rys/

The volume button (dial) broke on my Ford Maverick in summer. Moving to a touchscreen car felt like a sigh of relief that I no longer had to worry about buttons and dials breaking when I need to use them, and don't have to worry about a trip to a dealer or tearing apart a dash to replace them. I will say a button "feels" nicer, but the added risk to me wasn't worth it. To each their own

Amusing to see OpenAI being the "good guy" in the end

>Tesla's lead is about the same as a Roomba's.

What is this supposed to mean? Tesla and Roomba are in separate industries.