That's probably a better way to put it yeah.
And as fucked as it is, it is a fact that this does hold value and is backed by it.
It's just a pretty shit thing to be backed by ethically.
But nonetheless, there is value in bitcoin, it's just best we don't encourage further investment in such a thing.
Bitcoin is backed by the price of coal.
For all intents and purposes, bitcoin is effectively minted coal.
So who is doing the deporting? Why aren't we constantly naming names of who is doing the deporting here?
Which agency? What group? Who?
If we keep the offenders who are violating orders anonymous, then they can easier get away with shit.
If you just wrote "U.S. immigration authorities" you are a bad journalist. Get very fucking specific please.
Which authorities, of what agency, in what city
I primarily use GPT style tools like ChatGPT and whatnot.
The key is, rather than asking it to generate code, specify that you dont want code and instead want it to help you work through the solution. Tell it to ask you meaningful questions about your problem and effectively act as a rubber duck
Then, after you've chosen a solution with it, ask it to generate code based on all the above convo.
This will typically produce way higher quality results and helps avoid potential X/Y problems.
Humans are “trained” with maybe ten thousand “tokens” per day
Uhhh... you may wanna rerun those numbers.
It's waaaaaaaay more than that lol.
and take only a couple dozen watts for even the most complex thinking
Mate's literally got smoke coming out if his ears lol.
A single Wh is 860 calories...
I think you either have no idea wtf you are talking about, or your just made up a bunch of extremely wrong numbers to try and look smart.
Humans will encounter hundreds of thousands of tokens per day, ramping up to millions in school.
An human, by my estimate, has burned about 13,000 Wh by the time they reach adulthood. Maybe more depending in activity levels.
While yes, an AI costs substantially more Wh, it also is done in weeks so it's obviously going to be way less energy efficient due to the exponential laws of resistance. If we grew a functional human in like 2 months it'd prolly require way WAY more than 13,000 Wh during the process for similiar reasons.
Once trained, a single model can be duplicated infinitely. So it'd be more fair to compare how much millions of people cost to raise, compared to a single model to be trained. Because once trained, you can now make millions of copies of it...
Operating costs are continuing to go down and down and down. Diffusion based text generation just made another huge leap forward, reporting around a twenty times efficiency increase over traditional gpt style LLMs. Improvements like this are coming out every month.
For sure, much like how a cab driver has to know how to drive a cab.
AI is absolutely a "garbage in, garbage out" tool. Just having it doesn't automatically make you good at your job.
The difference in someone who can weild it well vs someone who has no idea what they are doing is palpable.
I'd rather not as well.
But I deeply doubt this will happen, that's not the gameplan here.
Trump is way more interested in money, invading canada isn't going to personally line his or belongs pockets.
This is more about trade deals.
Good, fire 2 devs out of 3.
Companies that do this will fail.
Successful companies respond to this by hiring more developers.
Consider the taxi cab driver:
With the invention if the automobile, cab drivers could do their job way faster and way cheaper.
Did companies fire drivers in response? God no. They hired more
Why?
Because they became more affordable, less wealthy clients could now afford their services which means demand went way way up
If you can do your work for half the cost, usually demand goes up by way more than x2 because as you go down in wealth levels of target demographics, your pool of clients exponentially grows
If I go from "it costs me 100k to make you a website" to "it costs me 50k to make you a website" my pool of possible clients more than doubles
Which means... you need to hire more devs asap to start matching this newfound level of demand
If you fire devs when your demand is about to skyrocket, you fucked up bad lol
You skipped possibility 3, which is actively happening ing:
Advancements in tech enable us to produce results at a much much cheaper cost
Which us happening with diffusion style LLMs that simultaneously cost less to train, cost less to run, but also produce both faster abd better quality outputs.
That's a big part people forget about AI: it's a feedback loop of improvement as soon as you can start using AI to develop AI
And we are past that mark now, most developers have easy access to AI as a tool to improve their performance, and AI is made by... software developers
So you get this loop where as we make better and better AIs, we get better and better at making AIs with the AIs...
It's incredibly likely the new diffusion AI systems were built with AI assisting in the process, enabling them to make a whole new tech innovation much faster and easier.
We are now in the uptick of the singularity, and have been for about a year now.
Same goes for hardware, it's very likely now that mvidia has AI incorporating into their production process, using it for micro optimizations in its architectures and designs.
And then those same optimized gpus turn around and get used to train and run even better AIs...
In 5-10 years we will look back on 2024 as the start of a very wild ride.
Remember we are just now in the "computers that take up entire warehouses" step of the tech.
Remember that in the 80s, a "computer" cost a fortune, took tonnes of resources, multiple people to run it, took up an entire room, was slow as hell, and could only do basic stuff.
But now 40 years later they fit in our pockets and are (non hyoerbole) billions of times faster.
I think by 2035 we will be looking at AI as something mass produced for consumers to just go in their homes, you go to best buy and compare different AI boxes to pick which one you are gonna get for your home.
We are still at the stage of people in the 80s looking at computers and pondering "why would someone even need to use this, why would someone put one in their house, let alone their pocket"
Yep. It's unethical but nonetheless makes the coin actually have tangible holdings, because it's actually impacting the real world.