LLM AI in the hugging face incident is just a complex roomba, brute forcing every direction until it can get out from under the couch.

That is such a great statement, I’m going to have to use that when describing LLMs.

Thanks 👍

That’s what you thought he meant?

This wasn’t a failure of communication on his part, it was a failure on yours.

That’s an oldie. Groucho Marx I think.

You’re missing the point, nobody is talking about trusting these companies.

You can tell if a connection is encrypted end to end or not. And if your paying for that service you can sue if you aren’t receiving what your paying for.

In digital security nobody relies on trust if they can help it. And security matters if you want to keep a competitive edge on your competition, so even shitty companies care about that.

I have significant doubts about this “any Tesla as robotaxi” idea at least if you’re referring to Musk’s empty promises about how you could make money off your own Tesla while not using it.

Oh man, I have serious doubts about that! But that’s what they’ve claimed they want to do. And I can see the profit motive there, so I have no doubt they’ll try. I’m not saying it’ll work.

I mean, there’s no problem here. In fact, I think it’s super sensible to make this a 2 seater.

Clearly their plan is ultimately for this robotaxi service to be something you can run on any Tesla car. Meaning that the majority of cars on the service will be 5 seaters.

On the other hand, I’d bet anything that the vast majority of rides requested are for a single rider. So if you’re going to make a vehicle specifically to be the optimal car for this purpose, it should definitely be a 2 seater. Smaller, lighter, better mileage, cheaper. If you need to order a ride for more people, a different car can do that and there are more of those available anyway.

The only gripe i have, is that this really could have been a 3 seater. Generally cars have adjustable front seats because the driver needs to be able to reach the pedals comfortably. But since that isn’t an issue here, it would have made a lot of sense to make it a bench seat just like most cars have in the back. Then again, the car does look quite small, so perhaps making it a 2 seater helped them constrain the size a little bit more.

Edit: Oh yeah, don’t refute the post, just down vote it, that’s a sane and well adjusted thing to do. I mean, I’m not even saying anything controversial…

I recently read somewhere that the total new pollution caused by data centers (more specifically, by the generation of the electricity they require) is now already significantly higher than the total pollution that has been avoided by all EVs.

Well I’d love to see that source. I do care about actually understanding the relative carbon footprints of these industries. You can’t make informed decisions without being informed, so that matters to me.

But that said, the EV industry desperately needed a kickstart, and it wasn’t happening prior to Tesla. You can actually attribute that move to electric to Tesla, as other car companies felt they needed to compete with them or be left behind.

On the other hand, you can’t attribute all AI data centers to Elon musk, he’s not responsible for AI in general. It only really makes sense to blame them for the percentage of carbon emissions generated by xAI. I’m having trouble finding any source to pinpoint what percentage that might be, but it’s very likely that xAI makes up for less than 10% of the global AI data center power consumption, probably much less.

Ah, rather than meaningful data, you want anecdotal data points.

I understand now.

Australia makes up 1.7% of the English speaking world, so you can assume it directly affects that percentage of Lemmy users (when posting in English).

I would argue everybody has benefited from the electric car revolution.

Air quality is better with more EVs. Before Tesla, EVs we’re actively being suppressed by big oil companies, auto companies were being discouraged and disincentivised to make them.

But that’s a different company from SpaceX, if the question is how has SpaceX made life better? It’s probably a lot harder to find positives there. But there are some things that were definitely good. If not for the crew dragon we wouldn’t have had a way to continue supplying the ISS, we almost certainly would have had to deorbit it years ago if the falcon 9 never flew (And in fact there were official plans to do exactly that).

Certainly some people have broadband through starlink in places where it was never an option before. I remember when I first went from dialup to cable Internet, it made my life better.

I’m not saying musk is a good guy, just that his companies have had a lot of effects, some of them positive.

Oh wow, now that’s some powerful wishful thinking!

Sure, who knows, it could happen!

Ok, so actually reading this article…

‘Swarms’ of cyborg cockroaches with cameras and miniature medical injectors could deliver supervised emergency care

So do they know they made assassin bots? Because they definitely made assassin bots from hell. Like for sure that’s the primary use case here.

I mean, “swarms of cyborg bugs with hypodermic needles”. Find a way to interpret that sentence that isn’t horrifying, I fucking dare you.

That is so much worse…

Ugh… I adjusted my post.

Oh yeah? You got an emp generator handy?

No! Bad biotech industry! Down!

Look what you did… Look what you did!

You made a medical device out of a cockroach!

Well? What do you have to say for yourself?

You really want to give the ccp all the credit? Weird. Are you a ccp shill?

So that show we mentioned, robot wars, are those robots? I mean it’s right there in the name, but is that just propaganda? These are all manually controlled.

What about that Boston dynamics dog, spot? Is that a robot? Because those can be controlled manually too.

I think you need to adjust your definition of “robot”, because you seem to have it wrong.

It’s not hiding it… It’s in the rules.

You’re acting like this is one monolithic ccp program, but there are engineering teams from many universities and companies competing here. This is in fact a lot like Robot Wars, it’s just a flashy robotics competition, there are a lot of these.

The Chinese government didn’t build any of these robots, none of them. They don’t have any claim to have invented something new, because they didn’t invent anything. What I’m saying is, your complaints don’t make any sense.

Don’t bash the article before you read it.

But Patel observed that many of the robotic competitors were still being teleoperated by human operators who directly controlled the robots’ actions. The World Humanoid Robot Games allowed for human teleoperation of robots in certain events, but penalized the final score if robots were being remotely controlled rather than performing autonomously.

In other words, they know. The games preferentially favor fully automated bots. But that’s a really high bar, so they also don’t make you go home if your team can’t achieve that in every event.

Well when they crash the company needs to replace the whole drone, so they are probably going to try to avoid that when possible.

That said, they should have to obey faa regs, but while the laws for private use are pretty clear, the commercial use regulations are layered and sort of in flux. Major operators are always pushing to have laws adjusted, and because leadership in the US is generally overly supportive of big business, those changes often go into place.

In other words, there ARE laws, but you know, it’s the US, so they can probably change them.

Well, it may depend on your phone and os version, it wasn’t always the case.