“Cached” implies that yes, the scraping will continue.

I would only believe this as far as it kind of makes sense anyway - their data centers are big enough a locally cached copy of most of the internet will simply allow much faster, cheaper itterations of their reinforcement learning tasks. Blaming it on their huggingface stunt is just PR.

To be fair, the actual article is also batshit.

“So is it as easy as just putting it in a sandbox? No, it’s not,” he concluded.

That comes after the company deployed swarms of agents in red-teaming exercises that attempted to escape from their sandbox.

So, start by /not/ setting up “swarms” and tasking them to hack shit?

Yes. But in proving them, we learned that efficiency of scale is required.

I don’t consider man’s work to be just physical labor.

The key here is that the English language currently does a piss-poor job of creating a destinction between meaningfull, avocational, enriching “work”, and meaningless, necessity-driven “labour.” Anthropologists have found pre-agrarian cultures tended to do far less labour, but had plenty of activity. I blame pretestant “work ethic” for equating taking out the trash and all that with meaningful work that makes a person.

That argument holds for existing proven tech like large nuclear and solar, but convincing governments to invest in unproven and unlikly tech is a great way to prevent actual transition to occur at all. They sop up cash and give governments reasons to build nothing now, or eventually build expensive tiny demonstration systems that do not effect the overall fossil fuel market. That list would include things like small modular reactors, hydrogen power, fusion, etc.

SMRs will be neat if they actually work, but there is no demostration that they can be remotely economically feasible. Even considering carbon emissions, it would be cheaper and more effective to improve the carbon footprint of the main power grid by a tiny fraction of a percent and then just give those small northern communities modern fossil fuel plants, maybe supplemented with renewables over time.

For large northern communities, grid connections are going to be the eventual solution either way.

How do you read “solar is more efficient than Nuclear” from that title? And what would that even mean? The title is clearly about the amount of solar power generation, not efficiency.

But both are American owned and operated but manufactured overseas…

Best to think of fossil fuels as a shot in the arm of the development of human civilization. On that timescale, It was always going to be temporary, whether due to climate change or simply the limits of availible fuel. We were always going to need to use it to bootstrap onto something else within a couple hundred years of the invention of the steam engine. The math is reasonable and yes, total solar power isnt a problem (storage and distribution is, but total availability isnt hard).

Hydrogen is just portable energy storage. Different problem than generation.

And yes, heat pumps run down to -20C or so now.

I see this all the damned time. Some people are obsessed with pages breaking at a heading or figure so they insert manual page breaks all over the damned place.

Even the slightest font kerning difference and you end up with blank or mostly blank page when some manual page break gets pushed to the next page.

Delete the manual page break that never should have been there? Nah, just cancel everything.

I swear I have been reading this article for 20 years. Some gov org balks at Microsoft cost and pitches free alternative. They dont plan on spending extra to complete the transition and then dont adequately train or build out the infrastructure.

Replacing an intrenched system with a free software alternative successfully will require more money in the first few years, not less.

They recognised that actual sales revenue pales in comparison to inflated stock prices (Teslas model) and to-big-to-fail government bailouts (2008).

Scale. Older data centers fit in the “light industrial” zoned parts of town and required some minor grid upgrades to the local electrical distribution.

Planned data centers require as much power as an entire rural state and are the size of a small town and get buit too fast to wait for any new power generation to be added to the grid.

Its the scale. You cant build GW datacenters without messing with everyone nearby.

As much as I would want to cry foul, this sound like a typical red team exercise.

Stupid on its face. The whole compromise was that search engines were just indexes and so not necissarily responsible for what they link users too (within limits), and websites encourage their bot because it sends them traffic.

Then they blow that all up with a “summary” no one asked for.

Every organization seems to over-use spreadsheets. Fortunately, most people really do utilize a small feature set.

My org has been trying to shut off “the zed drive” (network mount) for like a decade and staff still hate Onedrive. If it was actually better, why would staff resist using it so much?