471–480 of 672 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know if this counts as amazing optimism or just straight up blinders if that's your takeaway compared to the emphasis placed on non-renewable energy and government enforced ideology.
Current AIs are anything but politically neutral.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everything except geothermal and fission. Unless you count where the fissionable elements came from, in which case you're only left with the portion of geothermal that's from gravity (residual heat from the earth compacting itself into a planet).
Tidal waves comes from earths rotation, so not fusion nor fission.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Registering a company in Estonia: Three clicks with your e-resident ID, available to anyone. Europe isn't just Germany.
Estonia is specifically known as one of the easiest EU countries to incorporate in. And I'll note that Estonian e-resident ID requires collecting physical card from inside Estonia or a local Estonian embassy. Europe isn't just Germany, but the process is nearly as bad in France and Italy too, and together that's over 50% of EU GDP suffering from intense domestic corporate bureaucracy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Between all the talk of "alignment" and the parallel obsession with humanoid robots should make it obvious they want slaves.
There's nothing contextually negative about the word slave when you are talking about a machine. An AI is no more a slave than a lightbulb.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The EU has the same rules. Democracy is only the right to change leaders every few years, not an idealistic way for the people to govern.
No, that’s just one version. Other places work differently.
So no, democracy isn’t the ability to govern. It’s the ability to change those who govern, once every 5 years, i.e once every 4600 laws.
In the energy section, they talk about using nuclear fusion to power AI... but not solar. What a joke.
How much land mass would need to be covered by solar panels to power this future AI infrastructure. Yes, I'm implying that solar would be impractical, but I'm also genuinely curious.
David MacKay in "Sustainable Energy: Without the Hot Air" did a calculation circa 2010. To fulfill the world's energy needs back then, a 10 km^2 area in the Sahara desert would be sufficient. Even if you scaled that to 100 km^2, it's absolutely tiny on a global scale, and panels have only become more efficient since then.
The challenge of course is storage and distribution, but yeah, in terms of land area, it's not much.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your implication is misguided, solar is in fact the most practical way to add more electricity for most countries. The US generated an additional 64Twh of solar in 2024 compared to 2023. To get the same amount from nuclear you would need to build 5 large reactors in one year. As for land mass, we can re-use already spent land mass, like rooftops, parking lots, grazing farmland and such. Solar can also be placed on la…
Since America is so in love with car infrastructure, just turning open parking lots into covered lots would be more than enough. Just converting all Walmart parking to covered solar would meet almost half of all US electrical demand. 4,070,000,000,000 kWh US electric use in 2022 Using 330W panels it would require 8,447,488 panels (4,070,000,000,000 kWh / (330W * 4 hours/day * 365 days/year)) which is 164,726,016 sq f…
> Encourage Open-Source and Open-Weight AI It's good to see this, especially since they acknowledge that open weights is not equal to open source.
Without providing actual support like money , the government saying they encourage open-* AI is no more meaningful than me saying the same thing. In fact, if you open the PDF file and navigate to that section, the content is barely relevant at all.