If what you’re doing is database queries on large datasets, the network speed is not even close to the bottleneck unless you have a really dumbly partitioned cluster (in which case you need to fire your systems designer and your DBA).

There are more kinds of loads than just serving static data over a network.

Worry not: soon the American authorities will treat the former pretty much the same as the latter.

Honestly, both here and on Reddit I see more of that blind faith for Google and Microsoft. It’s so weird that the open-source community has a slice of people insisting their giant company is somehow virtuous because it’s slightly less fashionable.

Even weirder when they write paragraph’s psychoanalyzing imaginary people.

Oh, the irony!

It’s funny how your attempt at psychoanalyzing me from my post ended up relying on the idea that because I’m not pro-Apple then I must be for some other large company.

What you just did is called Projection - you’re interpreting others as if they were you and had your drives and motivations.

Allow me to introduce you to the idea that some people simply don’t think that having an emotional relation towards a brand, any brand, is healthy, and that not everybody is some brand-fan fighting against the fans of other brands like they’re sports teams.

The obvious Apple fanboy is the kind of person who sings praises to every single new version of every Apple product even when it barelly differs from the last one, never criticizes their products and goes to a queue outside an Apple store the evening of the day before a new release of an Apple product to be one of the first to buy it next morning when the store opens.

I’ve personally came across a couple of people just like that over the years.

(Granted, they were more common a decade or so ago)

Every single person here doggedly defending Apple’s choice whose argument boils down to “it’s fine it’s as I like it” (whilst ignoring that everybody else has their own likes and dislikes) to justify Apple only having a closed-down environment without an open environment as another option, is probably a fanboy.

“I love it the way it is” isn’t logical, it’s emotional, and there really isn’t a natural human tendency (in most people) to want to have their choices taken away, so something else is at play when somebody defends nobody having any options with Apple other than Apple, with the argument that “I like it like that”, since logically, having the option of an open system won’t take away the option of the closed system for those who like it.

That said, an alternative explanation for such behaviour is that they’re just self-centred people who are extremely used to a specific environment and couldn’t imagine why anybody would want it to be different, a posture which is often associated with fanboyism of the brand which makes that environment, but not always.

Also another explanation is paid sockpuppet.

There is a ton of fanboyism around Apple, same as there was for Musk some years ago.

I love BRAND is just another form of tribalism and one that Apple cultivated for themselves for decades.

(Curiously, going down the thread I saw fewer Apple fanboys that one would find in, say, Reddit)

Palantir is pretty core to the Surveillance Society in several supposedly Democratic countries. More in general just about all companies in that space such as the NSO Group makers of the Pegasus software for remote hacking of smartphones are invariably unethical

Similarly the whole business of Investment Banking is pretty unethical, and that definitely includes most Hedge Funds, the latter never being household names.

More broadly, I would expect UBI to trigger a golden age of invention and artistic creation because a lot of people would love to spend their time just creating new stuff without the need to monetise it but can’t under the current system, and even if a lot of that would be shit or crazily niche, the more people doing it and the freer they are to do it, the more really special and amazing stuff will be created.

Also the energy for those datacenters has to come from somewhere and non-renewable options (gas, oil, nuclear generation) also use a lot of water as part of the generation process itself (they all relly using the fuel to generate the steam to power turbines which generate the electricity) and for cooling.

It varies massivelly depending on the ML.

For example things like voice generation or object recognition can absolutelly be done with entirelly legit training datasets - literally pay a bunch of people to read some texts and you can train a voice generation engine with it and the work in object recognition is mainly tagging what’s in the images on top of a ton of easilly made images of things - a researcher can literally go around taking photos to make their dataset.

Image generation, on the other hand, not so much - you can only go so far with just plain photos a researcher can just go around and take on the street and they tend to relly a lot on artistic work of people who have never authorized the use of their work to train them, and LLMs clearly cannot be do without scrapping billions of pieces of actual work from billions of people.

Of course, what we tend to talk about here when we say “AI” is LLMs, which are IMHO the worst of the bunch.

That’s why they are superior!

You’ve just explained most Tech Startup unicorns, by the way.

Since the Patriot Act.

That second formula is for how much power gets dissipated in a resistance (hence the R in it) , not how much power travels through a line.

That said the previous poster was indeed incorrect - the required thickness of a cable through which a certain amount of power passes depends only on current, not voltage: make it too thin and it can literally melt with a high enough current and the formula of the power it is dissipating as heat that can cause it to melt is that second formula of yours and the R in that formula is inverselly proportional to the cross-cut area of the cable, which for a round cable is the good old area of a circle formula which depends on the square of the radius - in other words the thicker the cable the less current it can take without heating up too much or, putting it the other way around, the more current you want to safely pass through a cable the thicker it needs to be.

In summary, thinner cables heat up more with higher currents (and if they heat up enough they melt) because even pure copper has some resistance and the thinner the cable the higher the resistance. If you need to move Power, not current specifically (such as to charge something), you can chose more current or to have a higher voltage (because P = V x I), and chosing a higher current means you need thicker cables (because as explained above the cables would overheat and even melt otherwise) but a higher voltage doesn’t require a thicker cable.

… we should further have a system with carrier pidgeons carrying USB Flash disks for ultra slow but highly private Internet access.

LLMs have already massively slowded down in terms of improvement from generation to generation and they’re not at all improving when it comes to logical errors (because they’re not structured for that at all - they’re massive statistical engines for language, not reasoning devices), so it seems unlikely that this stage of LLM evolution is the beginning of something massive, rather it looks like it is has gone as far as it can.

Not saying they’re useless, just not at the early days of a game changer technology.

When Apple got into personal computers, that tech was just about to go from a niche thing to mass adoption (from big machines in universities and very large companies to mass adoption by consumers and businesses) and 3 decades of advancing by leaps and bounds, and similarly Apple’s entrance into portable networked computing (with iPhones and iPads) pretty much turned the niche of ultra portable computing devices (such as the Palm Pilot) into an omnipresent mass market product.

A lot of that was getting in early and then ridding the wave of incremental tech improvements in those areas and related areas.

What exactly wave of tech improvements is there going to be from now onwards on LLMs given that they’ve barelly improved in terms of output and the only significant improvement in the last couple of years was Deepseek’s significant reduction in required computing power from “insane” to “massive”? Even some kind of amazing fall in required resources crossed to mass adoption of NPUs and TPUs would still not solve the reliabilty problems of the Technology and so far nobody has managed to crack that specific nut.

I was there when personal computing took off, when mobile networked personal computing took of, when the interned took of and so on, and what I’m seeing with LLMs now (not 2 years ago, but now) doesn’t at all feel like being at the brink of a revolution like with at least the personal computer and the internet (the smartphone looked more like a cool gimmick back then, to be honest).

Frankly the AI “Revolution” at this stage feels a lot more like the Bitcoin “Revolution” after a few years and it having been taken over by greed and speculation, than the Personal Computer Revolution or the Internet Revolution.

An AI age in software development will yield massive returns to anybody who makes it to “senior designer-developer” by the end of this decade, IMHO, if only because the totally fucked up unmantainable code bases made by “automated junior developers” will much more quickly reach end of life (the point were it costs more to try and fix/upgrade them than to rewrite them) and need to replaced (and the way to do that is to reverse engineer the Software Requirements from the existing apps an then build from scratch something new that satisfies those requirements, something which LLMs are entirelly unable to do).

Also by all indications the current direction in Machine Learning (stuff like LLM) is a dead end which will never yield a “reasoning artificial intelligence” (even whilst quite a lot of other areas in ML have already reached sufficient capabilities in their domain to actually be useful) so there really isn’t any space to “implement (the main subdomain of ML that has been promoted as) AI better” IMHO.

If you go up to my original post, it was in response to somebody talking about German politics in the context of the Israeli Genocide.

As one of only a handful of nations who kept on “unwaveringly supporting” Israel with weapons even as the Genocide became more and more extreme and obvious beyond deniability, Germany definitely needs to be heavily criticized for that support and the underlying view of other human beings that is required for people to say - as Sholz did - “We unwaveringly support the Jewish Nation” (note the ethnicity very explicitly) as justification to keep sending weapons to Israel even after they had already murdered over 40,000 civilians including a list of babies 1 year old or less which was 17 pages long.

This isn’t the “police taking less seriously reports of being assaulted from victims of certain ethnicities than from other ethnicities” level of Racism far too common in many countries, this is the “we’ll keep on sending weapons to people who have murdered thousands of babies because we support the race of the murderers” level of Racism - the level of evil of unfairly treating a minority is a whole different scale from the level of evil of sending weapons to baby mass murderers because you support their race.

Absolutely, the likes of the US and UK, for example, are just as appallingly and disgustingly Racist.

However I myself did not expect this from Germany, both because I had a much much better opinion of Germans (I even lived there for 3 months) and because having in the past done horrible things (Nazism, the Holocaust) exactly because of extreme Racism and spent the time since remembering it and claiming “Never again”, it turned out that the “Never again” of most German politicians was the race-limited version “Never again shall we Germans do this to Jews” rather than the Humanist version of “Never again shall this happen”.

It’s hard for me to convey just how profoundly disappointing I am with Germany in addition to how disgusted I am with it and other nations who kept supporting baby mass murderers with weapons to kill more babies overtly because they support the race of the murderers.

So yeah, I totally agree with

I feel like Germany just got the acceleration card equipped

from the poster I was responding to, because until recently Germany hadn’t displayed anywhere near the levels of Racism required to, because of the race of the murderers, support baby mass murderers with weapons that will be used to murder more babies.

Ultimatelly it’s “Doing Research that advances knowledge for everybody” that should be allowed free use of copyrighted materials, whils activities for direct or indirect commercial gains (included Research whose results are Patented and then licensed for a fee) should not, IMHO.

If your business model only works if you break the Law, that mean’s you’re just another Organised Crime group.