there is not a single thing that could wipe out a deep sea habitat that wouldnt also wipe any space colonies. but i dont see anybody arguing for that, despite being far more achievable and practical. also, there is no feasible way for space colonies to be self sufficient anywhere in the near future, so wiping out earth also wipes out space colonies relying on it for supplies. this argument aboOt survivability is absurd.

the us largely does not charge for bags directly, they are a consumable that is part of the store’s customer overhead. At cost each bag is around 3 cents, and probably holds 15 to 50 dollars of merchandise that is being sold at around 2% net profit generally.

people often keep the bags and use them for other stuff, like trash bags or plastic linings or makeshift gloves. not everyone does. it’s wasteful, yes, though on net carbon impact it’s probably lower than plastic reusable bags and many plant fabric ones given a plastic industry exists anyway.

they are wire guided and far more stable than the similarly wire guided rockets.

is this a play on luddites?

i can give this class for free: dont

a consultant trying to make money off of teaching managers how to “manage people using ai”. this is very silly.

llm are no path to socialism and being tricked into believing that a small collection of ultrarich capitalists having ownership of middle and upper class jobs in a more literal sense is somehow going to bring that about is unfortunate. It’s neither here nor there, llm will never get there, but still unfortunate.

infinite patience to produce bullshit has extremely limited utility

us economists are hardly at threat of being disappeared for criticizing the economy

oh hey it’s that box from the chart. d&d is saved!

you’ve got it. the period of the sun up/sun down cycle would be the orbital period.

via statistical imitation. other methods, such as solving and implementing by first principles analytically, has not been shown to be np hard. the difference is important but the end result is still no agigpt in the foreseeable and unforeseeable future.

the limitation is specifically using the primary machine learning technique, same one all chatbots use at places claiming to pursue agi, which is statistical imitation, is np-hard.

i dont think you are grasping the absolute scale of cash injection necessary to make llm even appear vaguely tenable as a product.

funnily, the tech to do crypto currencies existed long before they got used for the grift. similarly, the plausible use cases for machine learning will mostly suffer from association with the fad of llms.

They are not, managers only think it is saving them money. All the same current llms are a grift that have no plausible value statement outside of scam markets. Even then the price of their use is both massively subsidized and scales at best exponentially with performance. This cannot last forever.

lol no

perhaps you could read the article, but the jist is that in this economic system the good product was so good that people bought it and then sales dried as nobody needed another, rendernng the company bankrupt.

deleted by creator

also the answer to that question, shitloads of data for a better ai, is yes… with logarithmic returns. massively underpriced (by cost to generate) returns that have questionable value statement at best.

Humanity is not intrinsically violent to this scale.