postscarce

joined 8 months ago
[–] postscarce@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

They would use radiator panels which automatically swivel so they’re edge-on to the sun.

I think the bigger problems are;

  1. The costs (monetary and environmental) of launching so many new satellites,
  2. Large-scale computing technology is untested in that kind of environment and will likely encounter a number of issues and unforeseen problems (so more launches until they get it right),
  3. Additional radiation will increase errors, so they will require a more robust design with more redundancy than Earth-based systems,
  4. If they’re in a low orbit similar to Starlink satellites (which have an expected lifetime of 5 to 7 years) they will need to be constantly replaced.
[–] postscarce@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 month ago

Sounds like you’re early on in the game, just take your time with it and enjoy it. In real life there are a lot of things you can do to simplify your life or connect with nature, from just finding local hiking trails all the way up to living completely off grid. Everything is a compromise though, so just take things one step at a time and see where you are most comfortable.

[–] postscarce@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

If the UK Government is so eager for sovereign AI capability, why are they relying on a US company to design, build, and presumably run it?

[–] postscarce@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Proof that global warming is not real!!!! Read your science… if something gets HOTTER it EXPANDS!!! Those scientist cucks have cucked themselves good this time!!!!

/s (in case it’s needed)

[–] postscarce@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 month ago

Well that’s good to hear. Hopefully most fans are like you and I get proved wrong. :-)

[–] postscarce@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 month ago (3 children)

I haven’t read the linked interview or watched the video, but based on the quotes in this post what Weir is saying isn’t wrong, it’s just (in my opinion) missing the point a bit. Do we really want AI to make art for us? Is that a good use for the technology?

My prediction is that AI generated books will end up replacing the ‘pulp’ part of the industry; the ‘airport novel’, the ‘trashy romance’, etc. If people can just prompt a machine to give them exactly the kind of book that they’re in the mood for, many will.

Human made books will still be valued because they’re human made, but they’ll probably occupy several niches; the books written mostly because the author loves writing (fan fiction, etc.) with little expectation of a large audience, and the higher-end literary works where the human element will be most valued.

I don’t think this is the direction that we should be taking with this technology. AI should be automating away the dangerous jobs and drudge-work so that humans can focus on more interesting and rewarding things, but at this point it would take a massive popular movement to shift things onto a better trajectory, and if we can’t collectively even get our shit together to properly address climate change, what chance do we have of doing this?

[–] postscarce@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

What’s interesting, to me, is that’s exactly how people hedge in the fringe UFO community too.

Ha! True. Very true. I find this scenario compelling but it’s based on a series of assumptions which individually seem plausible but I have no way to evaluate them all together. It’s like the Drake Equation; because the probabilities are multiplicative even tiny adjustments to a few of them end up making a huge difference to the final answer.

The thing is though, if there really is even a tiny chance of the ultimate outcome of this thought experiment being true (i.e. the end of humanity) then we should probably address it. And what that would look like is stopping the AI companies from doing any more research until they can prove their model will be safe, which should make people who are more concerned about AI slop happy too. Everybody wins by hitting the brakes. (Edit: well, Sam Altman doesn’t but I’m not going to lose sleep over that.)

[–] postscarce@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 months ago (2 children)

It’s not meant to be a specific prediction, it’s just a plausible (for when it was written) scenario. Don’t worry about the actual years, it could be off by an order of magnitude, just decide for yourself if any of the assumptions are completely wrong.

[–] postscarce@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 3 months ago

Nobody is programming those laws because it’s not possible with the way that LLMs are currently built and trained. Instead of The Three Laws, which are inviolable but in certain edge cases insufficient, we have Anthropic’s Constitution, which is 23,000 words worth of good intentions which Claude should keep in the back of its mind while it does whatever it wants to do.

[–] postscarce@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, globalisation has caused lots of problems, working class people have suffered even as the wealthy have flourished. But there’s no going back. A small nation like Britain couldn’t be completely self-sufficient without essentially regressing to a lower technology level, at which point they would just get invaded by somebody with an advanced military.

Instead we need to look at other ways of righting those wrongs, new strategies to ensure that the people can live happy and healthy lives. Lots of people want UBI, and I can see the attraction. I think it’s worth a try, even if it doesn’t work as advertised we could get feedback and adjust things until we find something that does work. The status quo is just not tenable.

[–] postscarce@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 3 months ago (3 children)

I think the problem is that Brexit was never about becoming ‘self-reliant’. As you said, Brexit cut the UK off from their single biggest export market, which is the exact opposite of what you need to do if you want to build up your industry. These days no country is completely self-reliant, and trying to be so, while it sounds good, just ends up meaning that you generalise, becoming mediocre at everything and exceptional at nothing.

If the Brexiteers truly wanted to make Britain great again they should have chosen a domain to be great in and lobbied for investment in it. Britain was already punching well above its weight in financial services, they could have invested further in that, for example, and become a true world leader… but only from within the single market, where they had unrestricted access to the talent and economies of the EU.

[–] postscarce@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I find it hard to visualise pictures but I am good at imagining how things relate to each other in space and how they move. For example, if I try to imagine a scene of somebody playing on a swing hanging from the branch of a tree, if I focus hard I can ‘see’ parts of it; the rough, frayed rope, the look of joy on the kid’s face, or whatever, but only one at a time. But I can easily imagine how the swing moves, how the rider leans back or forward to make it go higher. I don’t need to ‘see’ the image for this, it’s more abstract.

view more: next ›