![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
More moronic arts and craftsy hippie shit giving the left a shit reputation in the UK
More moronic arts and craftsy hippie shit giving the left a shit reputation in the UK
Cuz they’re different animals init
Okay, so some of the advances that chatGPT uses (consumer GPUs for training) are even older? 😁
As far as I can find out, there was only one use of GPUs prior to alexnet for CNN, and it certainty didn’t have the impact alexnet had. Besides, running this stuff on GPUs not CPUs is a relevant technological breakthrough, imagine how slow chayGPT would be running on a CPU. And it’s not at all as obvious as it seems, most weather forecasts still run on CPU clusters despite them being obvious targets for GPUs.
It’s been a long road
AlexNet is related, it was the first use of consumer gpus to train neutral networks no?
ChatGPT didn’t begin 18 months ago, the research that it originates from has been ongoing for years, how old is alexnet?
Preemptive nuclear strikes on all gpu chip fabs? There’s only like 7 of them
Can they not just go around the reservation?
🚨 GENERAL ELECTION 🚨
Well I don’t think that’s a given and I also don’t think that if that was the case it’d then follow that this policy is silly but I see and agree with the general points you’re making
I don’t really see how it’s pointless? The average person probably underestimated the risk of the UK being dragged into a conflict in this decade or the next and thus also the risk they’d need to prepare for that, so it’s probably helpful to bring how much people think they need to prep in line with how much they should prep, could save some lives.
It’s a bit ‘terminally online’ at times, but only a bit more than Reddit
Capitalism
The thing is that free markets have a fix for CO2 emissions - my (person A’s) climate and my property being affected by person B’s CO2 emissions is not a consensually entered contract, I didn’t agree to this. So allowing people to release CO2 emissions doesn’t follow the two rules of private property + free markets.
But people who gain from CO2 emissions being allowed just have way to much power
The article talks about biofuel, but not gas to liquids (i.e. Fischer–Tropsch).
Both are expensive but very much possible, it’s only the fact that burning fossil fuels is so cheap that prevents them being economically possible.
The very first time I drove a car on my own this happened (i.e. I was waiting to make the “left” turn) and I went and nearly hit another car lol
And they’re right wing af!