Recent comments in /f/technology

That007Spy t1_j94p1x6 wrote

Reply to comment by TeaKingMac in I Watched Elon Musk Kill Twitter’s Culture From the Inside | This bizarre episode in social-media history proves that it’s well past time for meaningful tech oversight by Hrmbee

I quote " Our solution was straightforward: Image cropping wasn’t a function that needed to be automated, so Twitter disabled the algorithm." Our solution means that it was her suggestion. Anyone who's solution to a problem like that is to shitcan the feature should be fired on general principles

2

venk t1_j94opbn wrote

Reply to Ultra-enthusiast hardware is strangling PC gaming by redhatGizmo

To me it’s kind of what happened to low cost digital cameras once good cameras started appearing on phones. The only cameras that people buy these days are high end / prosumer/professional cameras.

Consoles are pretty much mini PCs these days and you get a much better gaming experience with a $500 console than a $500 PC (or even putting in a $500 GPU in a PC a lot of times).

The true beauty of PC gaming, where they just crush consoles, can only really been seen at the higher end gaming PCs with high end monitors.

0

Disastrous_Court4545 t1_j94iq2s wrote

Reply to comment by MeatisOmalley in UN says AI poses 'serious risk' for human rights by Circlemadeeverything

You're right that the hardware can handle these models. I'm not arguing that.

What i'm arguing is saying millions of regular computers connected in a single network could rival the processing power of a supercomputer. The limitations of the network cables and network hardware devices aside, the CPUs wouldn't beat a supercomputer unless you somehow connected enough cores into one unit and ran a bunch of stuff using all cores at once. Regular computers can't beat a supercomputer at what a supercomputer is designed to do.

4

MeatisOmalley t1_j94hpmq wrote

Reply to comment by Disastrous_Court4545 in UN says AI poses 'serious risk' for human rights by Circlemadeeverything

this isn't some radical idea. Decentralized networks have been around for decades, but I think you'll be shocked by how much we will be able to do on just local hardware. One of the best AI image generation programs can be run locally on a mid-range computer today, and it only takes a few gigs to install. That's because neural nets are space- and power- effecient, relative to how much they are able to accomplish.

Absolute worse case scenario, a private company has its own servers and sells a product to users. This is already happening with AI, and it will continue to happen. It won't all solely be in the hands of the "powerful." there is guaranteed to be open-source alternatives.

1

Andybaby1 t1_j94g45e wrote

Reply to comment by cuddly_carcass in MIT team makes a case for direct carbon capture from seawater, not air by MotorDrive

A majority of the carbon released from fossil fuels ends up in the ocean. Only a very small percentage stays in the atmosphere.

Don't worry. Scientists have thought about this. If you want to know more take an oceans and environmental science course. Though to really understand it would take more than just one course. The interactions been air and ocean is extremely complex and happens on time scales from seconds to thousands of years. But the shoet of it when it comes to carbon in the ocean, carbon is not the limiting nutrient. It's usually micro nutrients like iron, nitrogen, or phosphorus. Carbon doesn't even hit the top 5 limiting nutrients in most systems.

This headline has been known by scientists for at least 50 years probably more than 100.

12

_Brandobaris_ t1_j94f7mh wrote

Reply to comment by cuddly_carcass in MIT team makes a case for direct carbon capture from seawater, not air by MotorDrive

Sure, the ocean absolutely needs the carbon. But I think the point of this is that the surface area of the ocean is so much larger than the rest of the surface area of the Earth and that the infusion of CO2 into the ocean is so significant that pulling it out of the ocean water is a lot easier than pulling it out of the air. The decarbonization of the air is done through a mass decarbonization of the water. Without a lot of understanding of the thermal dynamics of transport it’s very difficult to explain. I’m not trying to say that anyone who doesn’t understand is an idiot, it is just the opportunity of understanding.

This isn’t rocket science, it is so much fucking more difficult.

Edit grammar and clarity. And to be sure I’m not trying to shit on anyone.

34

pseudocultist t1_j94dgs3 wrote

Reply to comment by sknnbones in MIT team makes a case for direct carbon capture from seawater, not air by MotorDrive

>carbon dioxide has been used to extract additional oil from developed oil fields in the United States.

Wait so the first example given is them turning captured carbon into more fossil fuel production? Is this akin to the "first high is free" from the drug dealer, trying to lure capitalists into carbon capture?

10