Probably, my point was that you cant say if its increasing, decreasing or staying constant just from the number of times it’s been used. It could be that for most people its completely useless but for a small group its very usefull and they are using it more and more. Or as suggested it could be that everyone tried it a bit at first found it useless and stopped using it. Or that its kinda useful in very specific cases so it gets constantly used a tiny bit.
The “chart” that you posted, it showed barely any increase in the 1800s and massive increases in the last decades.
Its not a chart, to be that it would have to show some sort of relation between things. What it is is a list of things that were invented put onto an exponential curve to try and back up loony singularity naratives.
Trying to claim there was vastly less innovation in the entire 19th century than there was in the past decade is just nonsense.
Thats complete speculation on your part though. It could equally be people hardly used it at first then started to use it more as they found ways it was helpful. Unless you see the data there’s no reason to say one or the other.
Kinda. But you’d also need to send the entire infrastructure for running them, starting from a way to communicate “this is a universal turing machine”
Given that I havent expressed a preference and have never voted either Democrat or Republican in a single election (owing to not being American) I believe you may be inventing things about me.
And what I said stands, you functionally dont express a preference and what you do is equivalent to staying in bed and not turning out to vote.
So functionally, you abstain from voting and dont express a preference about how you are goverened.
The title kinda buries the lede there. I thought it was ridiculous to fine a platform just because a streamer happened to die on camera, but no, they were streaming months long abuse and torture of this guy at the hands of his co-streamers.
People make a complete mess of DIY with powertools, that doesnt mean that the powertools are the problem.
The energy usage stuff is just silly, its dwarfed by streaming and video games, never mind actually energy intensive things like heating transport and meat rearing.
You think venture capital dictates to the politburo what its priorities are in China?
Have you considered that if the worlds two superpowers are dead certain on this being an important area that they are willing to throw coutless billions of investment into, that they might know more than you do?
ok, but running a hairdryer for 5 minutes is well up into the hundreds of queries which is more than the vast majority of people will use in a week. The post I replied to was talking about it being 1-2% of energy usage, so that includes transport, heating and heavy industry. It just doesnt pass the smell test to me that something where a weeks worth of usage is exceeded by a person drying their hair once is comparable with such vast users of energy.
Do you have a source for that? Because given a chatgpt query takes a similar amount of energy to running a hair dryer for a few seconds i find it hard to believe.
Thank you for posting this, I’ve tried to say the same thing to people quite a few times but to roughly the same reaction as this post has got. Its an entirely emotional reaction, people have convinced themself that AI is bad (arguable) therefore anything bad said about them is true (incorrect).
It was meant to protect creators ability to earn from what they produce for a while so that they would be encouraged to create and share with the world.
I think we both agree that the current copyright regime is not doing this. But I fail to see how expanding the rights of rightsholders to dictate how you use the works that you have acquired (which is what this suite is over) doesnt just make that issue worse. I would much prefer to see copyrights drastically slashed from the absurd semi-perpetual system that the USA has pushed on the world and things move into the public realm after a decade or two, without doing that giving people who inherited or bought the rights over a work completed a centrury ago the legal power to say “you cannot read this work in a way we dont like” is abhorent.
Just so we’re clear, the problem is that people are driven to suicide because of draconian punishment of copyright infringment, not that it isnt happening to people we dont like. Right?
Its an urban planning and transport issue essentially. Medium density housing (think 4-6 story blocks) allows enough people to live in an area that it becomes feasible to have trams/light rail serving that area.
You’re right that there’s orders of magnitude difference, but its the driving that’s far more! One query to a chatGPT type model uses roughly 1Wh of energy, which is about the same as is released in burning one droplet of gasoline.
No I’m a meat eater who is anti-car! I’m more getting at how people have latched on to the energy use of AI models without realising the huge energy usage that goes into their daily lives.
I’m not defending it or attacking it, mearly saying that
Isnt supported by the information given. The GP gave a story they made up about how usage would be falling based on nothing at all, I gave two other alternate stories about how it could be either rising in usage or remaining flat to demonstrate that we cannot say anything about rate of change from a single average.