stainablesteel

you don't have to ship things the moon, you just build a mass driver on the moon that sends things to earth. it doesn't need to yield diamonds, this would be lucrative with just fresh water

the ability to mine the moon or asteroid belt seems extremely lucrative, the logistics of transporting materials to earth costs less than shipping them across the ocean, an astounding level of value creation.

my understanding of what classifies something as being a part of the same species is the fact that they can make children that are viable to have children themselves

horses and donkeys can breed to make mules, but the mules usually cant reproduce, this is the same with tigons and ligers but sometimes the females are viable

so if they can produce children that can produce children, they're the same species. where this line is blurred, so is the species line. geographical barriers have nothing to do with it.

it's not like cost and energy use aren't competitive factors in this game

the first model to outcompete its competitors while using less compute would be purchased more than anything else

sam altman commented on this topic before, and i think he's right

we need some kind of user-chat privilege much like doctors and their patients, or lawyers and their clients

i'm not sure it is, what's so useful about it?

i imagine they're doing superman level distributed compute across multiple clouds somewhere and cared more about delivering the final result of that than having the ability to pause. which is probably possible, but would require way more work than would be worthwhile. they probably thought the ability to stop and resubmit would be an adequate substitute.

i get this is annoying, but any of this supposed to be some kind of safety measure for users against malicious actors?

i dislike LLMs going down that road, i don't want to be punished for being mean to the clanker

what will happen is people will get away with it, unfettered, until someday someone ends up in a courtroom for it. they'll be punished, then if it happens frequently enough more people will chime in on wanting a way to inhibit it, maybe people would start wearing those anti-paparazzi-clothes that somehow ruin the footage

completed deleted my linkedin, it's not even the least bit useful. it's full of fake stories and communication that sounds more robotic than human

> claims bad faith

> starts off with insults

the judge ruling is independent of the prior events

you can think one thing about one of those things, and another about another

i think the military should be able to do what it wants

last i checked the german military is held down by stupid obligations forced onto it by its government that make it both inefficient and obsolete

assume this is the case on every platform

is this against their tos or something? what did they expect programmers to do, not automate the automated code-writer?

when someone says they work at meta, they get weird looks, but no one assumes they're incompetent

when someone says they work at microsoft, they get weird looks, and people assume they're incompetent

im not surprised, grok definitely falls behind as both a coding agent and a research tool.

claude codes the best, gpt is the best research tool, and grok is really only great at videos. which isn't a huge loss, but videos don't have the same functional capacity as academic topics and coding

i don't really see the problem

it's trained to do certain things, like code well

it's not trained to follow unexpected turns, and why should it be? i'd rather it be a better coder

it's a filtering step, they want people who are willing to work like slaves and it's fairly dystopian

this strangely self-hating and suicidal message has been spread for decades now, this falls along the same kinds of thinking as blood grudges and blood wars.

we don't need to adopt this form of thinking at all, no one is owed anything.

5 itself might have solved the problem of having too many different models somewhere in the backend

you're pointing out that it doesn't make sense

the point of laws like these isn't to make sense, it's to be annoying

this is a broader parenting problem, the state doesn't need to do this

politicians are interested in it because they're begging for some way to censor the internet, which would actually be even worse for parenting because now it prevents children from ever learning to be responsible with these highly addictive platforms

donated to who? in the past they would typically send them to africa or something but this actually has negative effects on local african economies for example

claiming something is a tiny percentage while not providing numbers is just a failed argument

you've not properly accounted for anything in support of your own argument through anything other than anecdotes and insults

given i havent provided data, ive certainly not provided insults

there's the cement to hold the turbine in place, the production of the turbine, the making of the materials that go into it, and the transportation of everything in this chain of events

even the mining of the materials has environmental impacts that aren't easily quantifiable, you've simply peaked through a door that most people can't realistically walk through

i have a hard time believing you've somehow accounted for all of these things in privileged enough manner to go around calling other people stupid

there's all sorts of environmental impacts that are simply difficult to calculate

and whales are a big topic, as the same people making the wind turbines are the ones whose overfishing are hurting the population (the chinese). should providing money for their economy via the purchase of wind turbines effect the number of whales being hunted, then what's the difference? the changing pH isn't as big a deal as people make it out to be, and it's not widely consistent across the entire ocean either, none of this is simple enough to just brush off

There's all the same waste products being dumped into the atmosphere during the production of the entire turbine itself, it's not entirely different.

And you didn't address the environmental damage to the oceans. this case is specifically greenlighting off-shore windfarms. Iif this was on land, i wouldn't care what people do with their own money and resources. But it's got serious implications for whales, of which there's a decreasing amount of. It's not foolish to care about endangering species that are important parts of underwater ecosystems.

You should take complaints seriously in general, I'm not mocking you for your point of view, those are nice details, and I take them seriously, so why are you mocking me? Mocking people over serious topics is just a display of insincerity. you seem to care a lot about the topic, so why not represent yourself better?

feel free to present the arguments rather than just name-calling

the post i replied to didn't present any substance either

there's serious ecological problems with these turbines, the materials cant be recycled, and their uninstallation is incredibly costly

they just don't seem like a great source of energy

looking at wind as objectively as I can, it doesn't look like a good investment, and the environmental problems caused by putting these in the ocean are tragic to wildlife

microsoft saw global enshittification and thought enshittifying enshittification would be a valid strategy to one-up their competition

this isn't new, microsoft has been doing this to its customers for years