s1k3s

Can't the US govt buy back any land they want for infrastructure? I mean forcibly buy back.

So basically it's the same as here, the supreme court (which is appointed, not elected) has power over elected officials?

(Because they can decide what is constitutional or not)

Edit: I have more questions but for some reason I can't reply to your replies :(

Where I'm from, our "supreme court" can overthrow congress legislation for not following the constitution. Is this the case here AND is this the case in the US (generally speaking)?

Is this open as in "OpenAI" or what are we doing here?

:)

Of course there's an impact, but the question is "what is impacting us more?"

https://www.energysage.com/about-clean-energy/solar/solar-en...

The energy sector is heavily subsidized by governments because it's important. "Market reality" doesn't work here.

Kind of. According to polls there are 52% of Americans supporting this. In the EU we have elections this weekend so there's no reason to come up with polls, just follow the results!

This is a great argument and perhaps the best argument to support the idea of going back to coal. I don't know how to answer this because I'm not an economist, but I'd suggest subsidizing such people from taxation until we reach a green energy goal. Sadly though, politicians don't address this at all.

The thing about money is that energy is a critical sector of the economy of each region, so governments push a lot of public funding towards it. That's why I'm bringing up politics here, otherwise the free market would take care of the issue as always.

I'm not talking about what's happening now (even though there's plenty of criticism to be said about the programs that we run). I'm talking about a new wave of politicians that's coming up in both regions, and they want this to stop.

Please allow me to go political for a second: both US and EU have an insane amount of politicians who support backing down on green energy and going back to coal mining, oil drilling and the like. I hope that at least the people who are intelligent enough to see the progress of green energy won't support that through their votes. We can literally have "free" energy coming from this star around us but instead of using it we're coming up with excuses that keep us from progressing.

That's it </political>

"We need a good dictator" - someone

Generally speaking it doesn't cost me billions to fix a bug. Hence the question...

Why does it keep exploding? Don't they already have the knowledge and tech to achieve this?

Go to the Wikipedia pages of these events and click on "Talk" at the top or see the history of those pages. The amount of people fighting over this information war is mindblowing.

If anything, this makes me question the accuracy of historical events that happened before humanity had access to such tools.

You can click "Cancel"

I'm impressed by the speed, it's probably the fastest such tool I've ever used. Congrats!

I like it, good job! I would suggest working on how you name things, like "action" and "operation" are a bit confusing for me.

May I ask if it was worth layering on top of Symfony, instead of just using it directly? It looks like a lot of work was put into this.

No, just figure out how the AI ranks resumes and then reposition / rephrase existing skills & experience to match that.

I wanted to make myself a tool to automatically generate the best version of my resume depending on the job I'm applying for, so that I would always pass AI screening. What a waste of time that would've been when you can simply send commands to GPT directly in the resume!

I love how we went from questioning copyright & licensing to "GPT vs Google, which one is better". To every artist or engineer out there who contributed to the general knowledge: you lost, everything you've ever done to help other people is now part of the models and there's nothing you can do to take it back. What even happened to the copyright strikes artists were supposed to bring up against these AI companies? That seems like 100 years ago :)

I know about that, but it's basically the same thing since reliable sources in the wikipedia terms are a set of sources that we collectively decide to trust. What's interesting about wikipedia sources is that it won't allow you to directly quote a person even though they are a well known trustworthy information source. Instead you must back up your statements through a 3rd party (usually media-related) entity. This is both good and bad, considering that journalists may not be the best at evaluating certain information, especially in the science or politics field.

> Real-time access to Knowledge

Wikipedia knowledge is basically "democracy" knowledge, i.e. the more people decided to support an idea, the "truer" it gets. That's not knowledge at all!

Okay, but how do you know it'll be like that? The demand is for the product they are currently selling, not the options you made up.

I genuinely don't understand what this has to do with what I said. I understand this decision upsets you for some reason, but it has nothing to do with the discussion.

They can't keep up with demand so that's one problem that could be solved with money.

This looks really good for promo videos. All scenes in here are basically that.

This is some I, Robot level stuff. That being said, I still fail to see the real world application of this thing, at least at a scalable affordable cost.

Haha, what's that gonna do? Ever heard of soft delete? It's a thing where even if you delete something off a website, the database still retains that information even though it becomes inaccessible by the public.

Everything we write on the web is like that, including this very comment.

For everyone else who doesn't understand what this means, he's saying Apple wants you to be able to run models on their devices, just like you've been doing on nvidia cards for a while.