Man, why did no one tell the people who invented bronze that they weren’t allowed to do it until they had a correct definition for metals and understood how they worked? I guess the person saying something can’t be done should stay out of the way of the people doing it.
>> I guess the person saying something can’t be done should stay out of the way of the people doing it.
I'll happily step out of the way once someone simply tells me what it is you're trying to accomplish. Until you can actually define it, you can't do "it".
The big tech companies are trying to make machines that replace all human labor. They call it artificial intelligence. Feel free to argue about definitions.
I'm not sure what 'inventing bronze' is supposed to be. 'Inventing' AGI is pretty much equivalent to creating new life, from scratch. And we don't have an idea on how to do that either, or how life came to be.
Intelligence and human health can't be defined neatly. They are what we call suitcase words. If there exists a physiological tradeoff between medical research about whether to live till 500 years or to be able to lift 1000kg when a person is in youth, those are different dimensions / directions across we can make progress. Same happens for intelligence. I think we are on right track.
I don't think the bar exam is scientifically designed to measure intelligence so that was an odd example. Citing the bar exam is like saying it passes the "Game of thrones trivia" exam so it must be intelligent.
As for IQ tests and the like, to the extent they are "scientific" they are designed based on empirical observations of humans. It is not designed to measure the intelligence of a statistical system containing a compressed version of the internet.
Or does this just prove lawyers are artificially intelligent?
yes, a glib response, but think about it: we define an intelligence test for humans, which by definition is an artificial construct. If we then get a computer to do well on the test we haven't proved it's on par with human intelligence, just that both meet some of the markers that the test makers are using as rough proxies for human intelligence. Maybe this helps signal or judge if AI is a useful tool for specific problems, but it doesn't mean AGI
Hi there! :) Just wanted to gently flag that one of the terms (beginning with the letter "r") in your comment isn't really aligned with the kind of inclusive language we try to encourage across the community. Totally understand it was likely unintentional - happens to all of us! Going forward, it'd be great to keep things phrased in a way that ensures everyone feels welcome and respected. Thanks so much for taking the time to share your thoughts here!
any serious business will(might?) have hundreds of Tbs of data. I store that in our DC and with a 2nd DC backup for about 1/10 the price of what it would cost in S3.
In my case we have a B2B SaaS where access patterns are occasional, revenue per customer is high, general server load is low. Cloud bills just don’t spike much. Labor is 100x the cost of our servers so saving a piddly amount of money on server costs while taking on even just a fraction of one technical employee’s worth of labor costs makes no sense.
Outlook ? Lol. In 2 years-time Outlook will only connect to MS365 and that's it. You're betting MS will switch to JMAP ? Lol again.
P.S. ("New" Outlook already only connects to MS365 servers and then stores your credentials and data on Azure, while they proxy to your actual IMAP/SMTP server )
I don't know about faster than light, but as soon as we have real AI, it will simply be information and should be able to travel at about speed of light.
It may be simply information, but if you put it into a radio signal and send it into the universe it won’t do anything on its own. Not unless someone receives it and understands it well enough to execute it. Assuming they’d want to - I guess it’s the interstellar equivalent of downloading and running a program from a spam email.
Yes! NP was originally written in 2010 so it's vanilla js on the client. Had a python server for many years, but when I had to move from python 2, I switched to js for the server as well. When the server was python I was using googles app engine database (can't remember what its called right now). These days, just a vanilla postgres and boring old SQL statements.
While physically possible, that is even less likely than FTL. It takes enormous amounts of fuel to reach relativistic speeds even with things like antimatter engines. Speeds fast enough for other galaxies are not possible unless invent impossible reactionless drive.
I don't know how you can say it's even less likely than FTL since everything we know shows that FTL is impossible. Virtually impossible is much easier than actually impossible.
Yeah, but the problem is that the batteries are still full of juice.
Obviously for rack based UPSs you'd "just" take out the UPS, or battery drawer, and replace somewhere more safe, or better yet, swap out the entire thing.
For more centralised UPSs that gets more difficult. The shitty old large UPSs were a bunch of cells bolted to a bus bar, and then onto the switchgear/concentraitor.
for Lithium, I would hope its proper electrical connectors, but you can never really tell.
off-topic: anyone aware of a service where I could plugin my api keys for openai/gemini/claude and it asks the same question to all 3 and refines the answer by using one of them as the final arbiter ?
https://msty.app (cross-platform) and https://chorus.sh (Mac only) do that though they are both a desktop app rather than a service. Arguably better than putting your API key somewhere online in my opinion.
