Yeah because it has an actual correlation, whereas BMI is a ridiculously oversimplified measurement designed for population statistics based on what data is easily available, not individual assessment.
So, your name is also this sort of identifier. But an “identifier” is not an “identity” in the way you mean it. Sometimes words are used in multiple ways.
You don’t seem to know much about where these datacenters are being built. They are usually greenfield sites, often in relatively rural areas where there may not actually be any local zoning regulations. Or when they are on brownfield urban sites, they are using “temporary” gas turbines that are incredibly loud and break all air pollution laws, taking advantage of loopholes and a complete lack of enforcement by the current EPA.
You think the folks who are successfully organizing against datacenters can’t use the same techniques and support networks to do the same thing against other nuisance uses?
They could (and should be required to) build out their own solar/wind/battery infra as part of standing up a new datacenter. So much money is being wasted on poisoning our air and further enriching the richest companies in the history of the world.
What a terrible outlook. “It’s not possible to do this thing safely at Meta’s scale” is an apologist cop-out. First of all, yes it is, Meta makes tens of billions of dollars of pure profit every year. They were that profitable while blowing tens of billions on the Metaverse debacle! They are not resource-constrained in any meaningful sense.
Secondly, if I’m wrong and it’s not possible, then you stop providing the dangerous service! There’s no reason Meta has to exist in its current form. If it can’t meet basic standards of human dignity in its product offerings, then it should change or cease to exist.
This author has a ton of axes to grind and a poor grasp of computing history or how industry works. Pretending like it’s strange or even bad that industrial datacenter builders with tens of billions of leveraged capital can outbuild the GPU capacity of chronically underfunded grant dependent universities whose mission is not to create industrial scale compute resources is like complaining local technical school auto-mechanic program isn’t out-producing Ford’s auto manufacturing numbers.
But then as soon as the author rolled out complaints about DEI and ethics, you knew what was going on. Okay, please leave higher ed and work for the industry you love. As you say, they are doing just fine.
The T, U, and f names are the cognitive load here, because they are meaningless variables. For a specific solution, those would have meaningful names that would make it easier to understand.
And they all, universally, are terrible, slow, buggy, confusing, constantly changing, and have terrible UX. It’s no wonder people think it would be a good idea to use an AI to disintermediate their interactions with their computers: it’s because 99% of software is absolute trash.
This statement is weak and wishy-washy compared to the blunt UEFA statement. Kudos to Europe. Here’s hoping CONCACAF can get brave enough to take the moral stance as well.
The LLM is reading the bytes of the file, not looking at a picture of its rendering. File metadata exists as well, and change history. Tons of places to hide text.
Even if you processed it via a screenshot, image files are processed byte by byte as well and can contain textual metadata.
TLDR: “we’re going to try to get money from LLM providers for access to our back catalog without getting permission from the authors or providing them with any share of the revenue”.
China, Russia, and plenty of other countries have all been actively and successfully destabilizing the US for well over a decade now. To the point that your argument about who is less a threat to Americans depends heavily on the skin color, religion, and ethnicity of those Americans.
Ironic to oppose giving AI tech to “authoritarian governments” while approvingly quoting the authoritarian-wannabe government of the US and framing that government as the good guys.
The “contents” represent the majority of the cost and meaningful functionality of what we call a “datacenter”. Those contents will not last for “real estate” debt timelines.
“In order to serve our customers better, we are phasing out the ‘Pro’ and ‘Plus’ plans, which will be replaced with new ‘Premium’ and ‘Extra’ plans. In addition, our ‘Business’ plans are now being replaced by improved ‘Corporate’ plans.”
The idea that we can’t get enough electrical power on earth because of supply constraints, but that we can solve that by launching the datacenters and their entire support infrastructure into space makes no sense unless you’re a huckster trying to pump up your space launch business ahead of an IPO. There’s no way we are more constrained on land-based solar+battery equipment than we would be on space-worthy solar+battery+space-cooling equipment plus sufficient launch infrastructure and resources. Meanwhile, our government is paying companies to stop building wind power and bombing sources of natural gas.