The problem is that dealing with regulators takes years and millions of dollars, reducing competition and societal benefit. He's quoting $200m in additional health costs borne mostly by Medicare/Medicaid. Regulations aren't a useful part of the system if they're gunked up.
The thing is, we really don't need people competing at selling carbon credits because it's an industry that literally only exists due to badly written regulations so it's hard to come up with a ton of sympathy.
Saying it exists only due to badly written regulations is rather bold assertion. It exists, because companies damage what isn't theirs. It is a regulation to protect property rights.
Companies are polluting shared resources. Classic tradegy of commons.
Credits is one of things we have come up that does work.
Sure, we could just ban it outright and say goodbye to industrial civilization. Most people don't agree with that.
I don't believe we have any indication that the big offerings (claude.ai, Gemini, operator, tasks, canvas, chatgpt) use multiple models in one call (other than for different modalities like having Gemini create an image). It seems to actually be very difficult technically and I'm curious as to why.
I wonder how much of an impact our being still so early in the productization phase of this all is. Like it takes a ton of work and training and coordination to get multiple models synced up into an offering and I think the companies are still optimizing for getting new ideas out there rather truly optimizing them.
Ooh, what are these ASICs you're talking about? My understanding was that we'll see AMD/Nvidia gpus continue to be pushed and very competitive as well as have new system architectures like cerebras or grok. I haven't heard about new compute platforms framed as ASICs.
Is Cerebras an integrated circuit or more an integrated wafer? :-)
And yeah their cost is ridiculous, on the order for high 6 to low 7 figures per wafer. The rack alone looks several times more expensive than the 8x NVIDIA pods [1]
Yeah I found that interesting. Flubbed embargo times makes sense, but could it also be that they're letting the news organizations have first dibs to build a little goodwill with the industry?
I'm not finding any direct sources from OpenAI, but here's this snippet from a Reuters article [1]
> Priced at 15 cents per million input tokens and 60 cents per million output tokens, the GPT-4o mini is more than 60% cheaper than GPT-3.5 Turbo, OpenAI said.
It currently outperforms the GPT-4 model on chat preferences and scored 82% on Massive Multitask Language Understanding (MMLU), OpenAI said.
...
> The GPT-4o mini model's score compared with 77.9% for Google's Gemini Flash and 73.8% for Anthropic's Claude Haiku, according to OpenAI.
For some more context: We don't know the size of 4o-mini but Mistral's just released NeMo 12B scores 68% on the MMLU. [2]
Just tried Toucan and it can't be disabled on localhost, a major pain for using it during work as an engineer. For those that haven't used toucan, it's an extension that translates words/phrases inline on a page with various levels of replacement frequency and complexity based on your proficiency with the language.
A YouTuber named DirtyTesla has done a series of drives over the years throughout his hometown where he's tracked the intervention and disengagement rates per mile. He often shows those numbers at the end of his videos.
I think that is not true. They can just take data from the route, annotate it and put it into their training set. That is how you would do route tuning.
Sort of off-topic but I believe Openpilot allows this. You can record every route you take, copy it off to your PC and run it in a simulator. You can then tweak the model for this particular issue.
"EGS are engineered reservoirs, created beneath the surface, where there is hot rock but limited pathways through which fluid can flow. During EGS development, the injection of fluid into the hot rock enhances the size and connectivity of fluid pathways by re-opening fractures. Once completed, EGS function just as natural geothermal systems do: fluids circulating through the hot rock carry energy to the surface through wells, driving turbines and generating electricity. EGS could provide up to 100+ GWe of economically viable capacity in the United States. This potential could supply green electricity to over 100,000,000 American homes, and represents a domestic energy source that is clean, reliable, flexible and renewable."
I can see the headlines from 40 years in the future: Geofracking Responsible for Devastation of the State of Tennessee as Record Breaking Earthquake Shakes the Eastern Seaboard”
Also how exactly is extracting heat from underground renewable? What exactly renews the constantly cooling core of our planet?
The core of the earth is essentially a fission reactor with quite a lot of fuel available. While this heat source is technically finite, so is the sun, and the universe itself. If you somehow live to see the heat death of the universe, you’re probably SOL.
But for humans living on earth today, and in timescales we care about (millions of years), the Earth’s core won’t run out of heat.
Not the core, which is made of stable elements like iron, but the crust. You'd think that uranium and thorium would settle to the core because they're heavy, but they're not siderophilic, so most of them stays in the crust. About two thirds of the geothermal heat flux is from fission in the crust: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_gradient
Non-sustainable heat extraction is much more likely, because the sustainable resource is only about 44 TW, while world marketed energy consumption is already 18 TW (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_energy_supply_and_consum...). By contrast, there are about 100 000 TW of solar energy available. There are billions of years of fossil heat locked up in the crust, amounting to conservatively many millions of times the total oil supply, and by extracting it faster than it was produced you can get much higher power.
Like (above-ground) nuclear energy, this is not currently an economically competitive source of exergy because of the cost of the heat engines required, except in unusual cases. It was until only a few years ago, but PV has gotten much cheaper since then. It probably won't be again until a revolution in manufacturing technology.
As others have pointed out, nothing is renewable on long enough timelines. The earth will burn out, the sun will burn out, eventually the universe will burn out.
There's no such thing as infinite energy in this universe. There's enough deuterium in the oceans to power humanity at our current pace until well after the sun expands and makes earth uninhabitable, but that is still a limit where we'd run out.
