Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Gavin Newsom vetoes SB 1047

gov.ca.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 514 posts

Re: Gavin Newsom vetoes SB 1047

#151

Post by derektank »

marshray wrote: post #108
derektank wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>So it seems like the only thing such a bill would achieve is to incentivize AI research to avoid California. Which, incidentally, would be pretty bad from a climate change perspective since many of the alternative locations for datacenters have a worse mix of renewables/nuclear to fossil fuels in their electricity generation. ~60% of VA's electricity is generated from burning fossil fuels (of which 1/12th is still c…

Electric power crosses state lines, very little loss. It's looking like cooling water may be more of a limiting factor. Yet, even this can be greatly reduced when electric power is cheap enough. Solar power is already "cheaper than free" in many places and times. If the initial winner-take-all training race ever slows down, perhaps training can be scheduled for energy cost-optimal times and places.

Transmission losses aren't negligible without investment in costly infrastructure like HVDC connections. It's always more efficient to site electricity generation as close to generation as feasibly possible.

Re: Gavin Newsom vetoes SB 1047

#152

Post by Eisenstein »

hydrox24 wrote: post #144
LeroyRaz wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The state has one of the highest illiteracy rates in the whole country (28%). To me, that implies they have some issue of governance. Source: https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/us-literacy... To be fair in the comparison, the literacy statistics for the whole of the US are pretty shocking from a European perspective.

For any others reading this, the _illiteracy_ rate is 23.1% in California according to the parent's source. This is indeed the highest illiteracy rate in the US thought. Having said that, I would have thought this was partially a measure of migration. Perhaps illegal migration?

The "medium to high English literacy skills" is the part that is important. If you can read and write Chinese and Spanish and French and Portuguese and Esperanto at a high level, but not English at a medium to high level, you are 'illiterate' in this stat.

Re: Gavin Newsom vetoes SB 1047

#154

Post by kortilla »

thinkingtoilet wrote: post #117
Lonestar1440 wrote: post #81

This is no way to run a state. The Democrat-dominated legislature passes everything that comes before it (and rejects anything that the GOP touches, in committee) and then the Governor needs to veto the looniest 20% of them to keep us from falling into total chaos. This AI bill was far from the worst one. "Vote out the legislators!" but for who... the Republican party? And we don't even get a choice on the general ba…

If California was it's own country, it would be one of the biggest most successful countries in the world. Like every where else it has it's problems but it's being run just fine. Objectively, there are many states that are far worse off in any key metric.

What is success in your metric? are you just counting GDP of companies that happen to be located there? If so, that has very little relationship to how well the state is being run.

It’s very easy to make arguments that they are successful in spite of a terribly run state government and are being protected by federal laws keeping the loonies in check (interstate commerce clause, etc).

Re: Gavin Newsom vetoes SB 1047

#155

Post by wslh »

CSMastermind wrote: post #75
SonOfLilit wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why would Google, Microsoft and OpenAI oppose a torpedo against open models? Aren't they positioned to benefit the most?

The bill included language that required the creators of models to have various "safety" features that would severely restrict their development. It required audits and other regulatory hurdles to build the models at all.

All that means that the barriers for entry for startups skyrocket.

Re: Gavin Newsom vetoes SB 1047

#156

Post by kortilla »

0_____0 wrote: post #145
LeroyRaz wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The state has one of the highest illiteracy rates in the whole country (28%). To me, that implies they have some issue of governance. Source: https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/us-literacy... To be fair in the comparison, the literacy statistics for the whole of the US are pretty shocking from a European perspective.

The data you're showing doesn't appear to differentiate between "Can read English" and "Can read in some language ". Big immigrant population, same with New York. Having grown up in California I can tell you that there aren't 28% of kids coming out of public school who can't read anything. Edit to add: my own hometown had a lot of people who couldn't speak English. Lots of elderly mothers of Chinese immigrants whose…

Not being able to read English in the US is bad though. It makes you a very inefficient citizen even though you can get by. Being literate in Chinese and not being able to read or even speak English is far worse than an illiterate person that can speak English in day to day interactions.

Re: Gavin Newsom vetoes SB 1047

#157

Post by tightbookkeeper »

thinkingtoilet wrote: post #117
Lonestar1440 wrote: post #81

This is no way to run a state. The Democrat-dominated legislature passes everything that comes before it (and rejects anything that the GOP touches, in committee) and then the Governor needs to veto the looniest 20% of them to keep us from falling into total chaos. This AI bill was far from the worst one. "Vote out the legislators!" but for who... the Republican party? And we don't even get a choice on the general ba…

If California was it's own country, it would be one of the biggest most successful countries in the world. Like every where else it has it's problems but it's being run just fine. Objectively, there are many states that are far worse off in any key metric.

In this case the success is in spite of the governance rather than because of it.

The golden age of California was a long time ago.

Re: Gavin Newsom vetoes SB 1047

#158

Post by marshray »

derektank wrote: post #151
marshray wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Electric power crosses state lines, very little loss. It's looking like cooling water may be more of a limiting factor. Yet, even this can be greatly reduced when electric power is cheap enough. Solar power is already "cheaper than free" in many places and times. If the initial winner-take-all training race ever slows down, perhaps training can be scheduled for energy cost-optimal times and places.

Transmission losses aren't negligible without investment in costly infrastructure like HVDC connections. It's always more efficient to site electricity generation as close to generation as feasibly possible.

Electric power transmission loss is less than 5%:

https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/flow-graphs/electricity...

   14.26 Net generation
   0.67 "Transmission and delivery losses and unaccounted for"
It's just a tiny fraction of the losses resulting from burning fuel to heat water to produce steam to drive a turbine to yield electric power.

Re: Gavin Newsom vetoes SB 1047

#159

Post by swasheck »

kortilla wrote: post #156
0_____0 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The data you're showing doesn't appear to differentiate between "Can read English" and "Can read in some language ". Big immigrant population, same with New York. Having grown up in California I can tell you that there aren't 28% of kids coming out of public school who can't read anything. Edit to add: my own hometown had a lot of people who couldn't speak English. Lots of elderly mothers of Chinese immigrants whose…

Not being able to read English in the US is bad though. It makes you a very inefficient citizen even though you can get by. Being literate in Chinese and not being able to read or even speak English is far worse than an illiterate person that can speak English in day to day interactions.

which is why the statistics need to be careful annotated. lacking literacy at all is a different dimension than lacking fluency the national lingua franca

Re: Gavin Newsom vetoes SB 1047

#160

Post by gdiamos »

llamaimperative wrote: post #91
gdiamos wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Advanced technology will drop the cost of training. The flop targets in that bill would be like saying “640KB of memory is all we will ever need” and outlawing anything more. Imagine what other countries would have done to us if we allowed a monopoly like that on memory in 1980.

No, there are two thresholds and BOTH must be met. One of those is $100MM in training costs. The other is measured in FLOPs but is already larger than GPT-4, so the “think of the small guys!” argument doesn’t make much sense.

Tell that to me when we get to llama 15
Post reply on HN