I was asked for evidence that energy prices have increased. I provided that. Now you're shifting the goalposts to ask for evidence that the increase in energy prices is solely due to data center demand, pretending you've proven that an increase in demand somehow didn't lead to an increase in prices, then retreating to "you don't understand markets" as a vague defense of your idea that increased demand doesn't drive prices up.
it's the demand delta, not the total demand, that's concerning. Also not all use cases are created equal: using water to keep people alive is legitimate and using water to build a machine that can automatically almost count the number of vowels in a sentence is not legitimate, especially when that usage drives up demand and makes it harder to use water to keep people alive.
it's my power bill, dude. and everyone else's around me. your paper stops measuring that data right at the time when everyone's bills started increasing sharply.
99% is an interesting figure because that's roughly how much my energy bill has increased despite no significant change in my usage due to data center demand on the grid
everything in this thread is raw speculation, obv, but if i had to put money on anything i'd say this is a left-pad incident. some piece of something or other that all of these services happen to depend on went down. Second most likely seems to be some random failure of one leading to an unexpected traffic spike in others, though it seems like we've been talking about automated scalability in web apps for so long that there should at least be a response to, if not a solution for, this sort of problem.
>fish already live in a world of salt, and so I wonder of worms and parasites still survived this proxess.
As always, dose determines toxicity. While alive and in salt water fish are pretty good about regulating their internal salinity and the parasites that live in them enjoyed the benefits of that regulated environment. When dead and packed in salt, fish are noticeably less able to maintain homeostasis and the concentration of salt is enough to pull the moisture out of both the fish and any parasites via osmosis. This kills the parasites, though there may be some cases where eggs survive that I'm not aware of.
Ayurvedic medicine is a similar idea from the indian subcontinent. Foods have different medicinal properties like hot/cold, heavy/light, etc and those foods interact with your body type (which itself is a confluence of three factors called dosha that everyone has but in varying ratios) in order to produce certain effects.
MAM credits you with points that can be used to buy upload credit or to make downloading a given torrent not count against your total bytes downloaded (freeleech)
Torrentleech has a point system as well and also automatically makes torrents above a certain size freeleech.
For both, the accumulation of points is so generous that you'll really only run into ratio issues if you go looking for them. Hell, MAM has so many people that are perpetually sitting with the maximum amount of points available and fantastic ratios that they have lotteries where users with more points than they could ever spend can spend them gambling on upload credit, but with the ability to spend more on a ticket to increase the prize (but not increase the odds of them winning). The practical upshot of this is that users who don't increase the prize get a much higher expected value for an entry than users that do, and those users i talked about that have more points than they can spend essentially use those points to buy other users download credits.
You're absolutely right that the base torrenting system is one where someone has to upload every byte that's downloaded and vice versa but these trackers are designed to ensure that basically anyone who makes a good
The aristocrats have had to split their treasure with the thugs since the beginning of time and this represents a very real chance to keep huge swaths of that treasure for themselves. Finally they can automate away doing violence against anyone who threatens the social order when it used to be an unavoidable cost of doing business.
a native app's job isn't to parallel the web app's feature set. a native app's job is to get you to accidentally opt in to all sorts of invasive surveillance and allow for a constant stream of attempts to grab your attention.
I will indeed hold that, and it was my point to go to against post you were replying to and bolster your position. They try to make a point about modeling but they back it up by talking about virtually modeling real, physical processes. If I model a hurricane with a computer nothing gets wet. If I model a hurricane with giant fans and sprinklers then things do get wet and, if I'm able to achieve a certain level of fidelity with my giant fans and sprinklers then whether or not i've made a hurricane is a rather arbitrary distinction as your living room is several blocks from where it was yesterday regardless of whether it was put there by a real hurricane or a mere model.
This. There are plenty of people who believe to the bottoms of their hearts that inanimate things have a consciousness. If consciousness is the belief of consciousness, then those things are conscious. But for each person who believes they are, at least one person does not believe that they are. So those things also lack belief, and are therefore not conscious. Unless the author wants to propose some idea of consciousness by plurality, where if more people think a thing thinks than don't. But that would mean that a thing's consciousness can come and go without anything about the actual thing changing at all.
Realistically this article is just trying to make it seem that believing something is the same as it being true and that's patently absurd, but it makes people feel good to think it.
Well, this certainly makes arguing against AI's consciousness much easier. I'm happy assuming that conclusion and then logicking my way back to the premise, though it's obv philosophically unsound.
I came to the opposite conclusion using similar logic. If software is just bits being fed into the machine then there is no limit to the number of bits or the complexity of their arrangement beyond the feed rate of the machine. The bits that make up software do not have any weight to them. There is a strong limit to how much concrete and steel you can add to a bridge. There is a limit to how many neutrons you can shove into the nucleus of an atom, or how many carbon rings you can chain together. Software is unique in that it escapes almost the entirety of physics as a limiter to what can be done, being really only subject to the speed of light as a limit to the rate at which things can be done.
Corporations are only people when it comes to rights and profits. When it comes to responsibilities they revert to being nebulous entities whose behaviors are emergent phenomena that no one can actually be held accountable for. Or, to borrow the old maxim, "Corporations aren't people until Texas executes one."
What's really interesting is when you look at how much good they could do without ever actually affecting their lifestyle at all. What actually is $100 million to a trillionaire? What could he do with 1,000,000,000,000 that he can't do with 999,900,000,000?
This. Software hypothetically can permit unlimited complexity. There are only so many ways you can try to build a bridge such that it won't collapse. There are an infinite number of ways that a set of instructions can reach a desired state given enough time, processing and memory resources. This, combined with our relative naivete in how to design and build software that does not approach infinite complexity compared to other engineering disciplines means that the primary thing about building software is managing complexity.
just because AI is really good at being wrong doesn't mean that people aren't themselves capable of being wrong manually. Do I think someone may have consulted AI? Almost certainly, in fact I'd guess that there's an internal policy document somewhere saying that they have to consult AI before making choices like this. Do I think that good old fashioned human incompetence and baseless speculation are at the heart of this? also yes.
I'm such a sucker for terminal games, especially the idea that you can exploit screen refreshes for rudimentary animation. There used to be a game called Paintball Net that was a top-down, real time paintball match simulator. It had a GUI client, but you could also just fire up telnet to connect and it would paint the state of the game one screen at a time as fast as your little 33kb dial up modem could handle.
a week of wfh from a company that's equipped to support remote work anyway and only wants in-office 25% of the time hardly qualifies as "insane overreaction". I'd says it's probably more along the lines of "a single email".
IDK what I would do if I was working and couldn't hear my coworker loudly "spontaneously collaborating" on the phone with the contractor installing his kitchen floor. At least I have an hour commute each way, $25/day in parking costs and another $20/day in food costs to comfort me.
It's possible that they just took the state of contract negotiations as an implicit threat of a strike without waiting for the union to explicitly announce the threat.