hackeraccount

If prices go up there aren't lines. You get lines when demand goes up and supply doesn't or supply goes down and demand doesn't follow. Either way the "fix" is either to raise prices or have lines.

When it comes to people's take on AI it reminds me of nothing so much as the way people reacted to the introduction of computers in the 1950's and 60's.

I'm not quite clear what lesson there is to be learned from that though.

You're like a smarter more articulate version of me.

I used to use Sway - switched to hyperland very briefly and it was so busy and a pain to work with.

Niri on the other hand is as complicated as I want it to be.

This.

I still think AI is at root at UI improvement for working with computers. It's an equivalent to the general move of command line interaction to WIMP.

Freaking out over this seems like nothing to me so much as that Tracy/Hepburn movie ... Desk Set.

Hey! I think I saw you on Ars. Or maybe someone there copied and pasted this?

I dropped out of Kindergarten to make snail teeth powered AI!

So the argument is that any piece of regulation will always lead to a positive outcome?

How is that possible?

Just because I'm buying something for someone other then myself it doesn't follow that I don't care how the money is spent. If my tax dollars are wasted it's no comfort to tell myself that the money would have been spent by someone else for someone else in any case.

I don't think sovereignty works that way.

decade+ is not really that long, is it? Say you're correct in that time frame. If you put money in now to a venture that seems uncertain then in 5 years it's going to seem much less uncertain - and so the investment will be worth that much more.

I think there's an oft repeated view that markets only look to the next quarter. That's not really true. Markets (or people) are willing to go in on long term investments as long as they believe they understand the uncertainty. Which leads to crazy 2nd and 3rd order speculation (I think you think that they think...)

Personally putting money into space based datacenters seems crazy to me currently but in a couple of years it'll be more clear as to just how crazy this is. At which point the opportunity (and risk) will be gone one way or the other.

How does this get them a government contract?

Jesus. I had a colonoscopy. Don't tell me about drinking 2 gallons of water. I won't even get started on an ice cream cone a day.

Someone upthread mentioned that arguments can be about convincing the person you're arguing with or convincing the audience which is absolutely true.

I'd suggest that arguments are frequently not about convincing anyone of anything. They become conversations withe people who already agree with you using the person you're arguing against as a foil.

I can't find it but my favorite Robin Hood comic strip was one where Robin Hood robs from someone rich and gives it to someone poor.

I'm rich! shouts the poor person.

You're what? says Robin Hood.

Nice pull.

That last line, "children playing in the water make noise. When they get quiet, you get to them and find out why."

fills me with dread.

Yeah but more bright is more safe ... for me driving around with the light of a thousand suns coming out of the front of my care at night it seems pretty safe, "good luck everybody else".

For the down votes I would have gone with the "Shocker that Jacobian finds something bad and puts the root cause to Capitalism" comment.

Isn't "data centers are using all the electricity" the same as "we're not pricing electricity correctly"?

Instead of a ban just make sure they pay what's needed to keep capacity where it needs to be.

Nah, there'll be a lot of people who think they know what happened and there'll be one person someone at BO who really knows what happened they just don't know they know it yet. In the course of the analysis that person will hear a couple of known facts and there will be feeling in the pit of your stomach when all doubt goes away. Worst case scenario is that it's something they signed off on.

I hear what you're saying but ... clearly SpaceX has made some broad technical decisions - I'm think of using metholox or making starship out of steel or falcon first stage re-usability - that seem to have been the correct choice.

I doubt Musk originated these idea but he was the one who ultimately made the decision on them. There were a lot of other people who had the same choice and either didn't come down that way or took a lot longer to come to the same place.

Like I said, genius? I personally wouldn't use that word. He's not an idiot though. He might be the minimum viable product for technical knowledge combined with a large amount of money but that's still pretty remarkable.

No one looks at money that way. If it were I'd find a million dollars under the seat cushions of the couch that Bill Gate's owns. No one is so flaked out they don't know that a 100 grand is a nice chunk of change or what the costs of staying vs. moving are.

I wouldn't say all the benefits. I mean if I get a cheaper ride from the airport I'm benefiting at least a little bit from this, right?

"Why are slaves doing work for their masters?"

Maybe drop that one from the list.

They'll go to Florida.

I worked with a guy who had an internship studying the effects of some drug on rats. He said he didn't have much of a problem killing the rats but also claimed that he knew his dog realized what he was up to at work.

It made me think he might have had more of a problem with it then he thought.

Is regulation the word you're looking for? It seems like you just need to get pricing right not regulation.

Any mention of typesetting should work to include Mark Twain's quote about his relationship with the inventor James Paige, who worked on a never quite working as well as could be wished typesetting machine that Twain invested heavily in.

"Paige and I always meet on effusively affectionate terms; and yet he knows perfectly well that if I had his nuts in a steel-trap I would shut out all human succor and watch that trap till he died."

It's probably impossible but bring back the judicial filibuster. If a judge knows that get confirmed in the Senate they'll have to have bipartisan support then you'll end up with a group of judges desperate to appeal to everyone and alienate no one.

yeah. I was waiting for something to get at the consistency of what I was clicking i.e. if I think A is better then B and B is better then C why do I think C is better then A.