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

xAI, SpaceX, and the Race for AI Buildout

illegal.solutions

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 129 posts

Re: xAI, SpaceX, and the Race for AI Buildout

#81

Post by BeetleB »

giantrobot wrote: post #69
BeetleB wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct me if I'm wrong: Is the article about a badly acting LLM?

Just because the machinery in the building grinds puppies into pulp doesn't mean the building itself is bad. I don't get what the big problem is!

Pretty bad analogy. The building is violating some laws. The laws being violated are unrelated to potential other laws being violated.

If I own a house and am not paying property taxes on it, the fact that I'm murdering people in that house is irrelevant.

Re: xAI, SpaceX, and the Race for AI Buildout

#82

Post by throwaway27448 »

letmevoteplease wrote: post #72
throwaway27448 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but you can hardly expect to interact with the world in a rational way if you explicitly decide to ignore it

Look at this statement from the article: >These racks are needed to keep up with the ballooning requirements of each new "frontier" (a buzzword label with no actual inclination of performance of improvement) model developed, which everyone bought into the AI hype will immediately hop to because it's all novelty over utility. This is a mind-blowingly clueless assertion. This is not a person capable of rationally asses…

> This is a mind-blowingly clueless assertion. This is not a person capable of rationally assessing facts. At best this kind of writing is interesting as an artifict of human delusion and cognitive bias.

How do you figure? This description would be best applied to you:

* Musk both wildly wealthy because of his popularity and simultaneously incompetent

* Musk and other investors have made boatloads of money off the promise that specifically american, boutique LLMs will deliver labor savings. in his case spaces, but it's indistinguishable from similar frauds such as eg openai, anthropic, etc

* Musk's properties will likely collapse unless they can find new revenue or investors.

Musk can only grift so many people before his bottom falls out

Re: xAI, SpaceX, and the Race for AI Buildout

#83

Post by efitz »

etchalon wrote: post #34
miyoji wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The HN crowd that doesn't seem to get it is like that because they're either white collar criminals themselves, or they work for such criminals.

"It's only a crime because it's against the law." - someone, inevitably

Of course that’s a silly turn of phrase but there is a grain of truth.

Most people believe that the law should mirror the ethics or morality of the society, and absent something clearly harmful, most people don’t understand why something with nobody clearly harmed should be illegal.

Re: xAI, SpaceX, and the Race for AI Buildout

#84

Post by BeetleB »

jackb4040 wrote: post #74
BeetleB wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Pollution is bad but it's a different story if it's curing cancer vs making nudes of female politicians. Completely disagree. That sort of reasoning is why plenty of African Americans were forcibly moved from their own properties in the 20th century. "The land will be put to great use!" (And in a lot of cases, it was - still wrong).

(I also disagree, I'm just using it to argue with the guy above claiming it's irrelevant) Within your metaphor, the person I'm replying to would say "I did nothing to stop the land theft because I found it annoying how people made irrelevant arguments about what the land would be used for". Really calls into question if their real position is what they say it is.

> Within your metaphor, the person I'm replying to would say "I did nothing to stop the land theft because I found it annoying how people made irrelevant arguments about what the land would be used for". Really calls into question if their real position is what they say it is.

You can introduce that person to the concept of "strawman".

Not reading an article does not equate to any of the following: Support, Opposition, Neutrality, Apathy, Indifference.

Re: xAI, SpaceX, and the Race for AI Buildout

#85

Post by nearlyepic »

BeetleB wrote: post #42
nearlyepic wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hardly irrelevant. The purpose is establishing a pattern of abusive behavior so this can't be dismissed as a "misunderstanding".

Then show me a pattern of flouting regulations (which I can easily believe he has). His terrible views on unrelated issues are irrelevant.

This is being needlessly pedantic. Disdain for the rights of other people does not start and end at literal written regulations.

And yeah, on some level it's not strictly relevant to the exact legal question being discussed, but part of the purpose of an article is to give you reasons to give a shit about what's being reported.

Re: xAI, SpaceX, and the Race for AI Buildout

#86

Post by ballon_monkey »

culi wrote: post #2

> In the latest example of corporations existing outside of the law, SpaceX (who is for some reason the controlling entity of xAI now) announced they'll be removing the illegal, unpermitted gas turbines they've been running at their Memphis Colossus data center... by July 2027. This is the thing the HN crowd doesn't seem to get whenever a post is on here about data centers. They are often times doing outright illegal…

> unpermitted gas turbines they've been running at their Memphis Colossus data center

Just a reminder that when you're building a business, having land and a datacenter ready and cannot be switched on, with idle staff, costs the business money.

xAI could only draw 7-8MW from the grid and needed to run 10s of 1000s of H1000s. They shipped in 15 gas turbines as a more permanent onsite power plant while TVA/MLGW worked on expanding the grid supply to 150-300MW.

So you can get upset at musk all you want, but he has a business to run, and waiting for a full grid build out isn't practical.

Re: xAI, SpaceX, and the Race for AI Buildout

#87

Post by solid_fuel »

BeetleB wrote: post #41
solid_fuel wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting, you encounter a fact you don’t like and just quit reading all together. What a curious way to engage with the world.

I'll bite. The title is about ignoring regulations related to a data center. How is any of what I quoted relevant? If the article were about Elon Musk's racist views, then by all means I'd be fine with it. But his (or Grok's) racism is irrelevant to the laws he is violating. Would it be OK if a well respected billionaire flouted those laws?

You don't think it's relevant to discuss what has been done with the resources from breaking these regulations? I think it's very relevant to the article. If this was about building illegal gas turbines to power cancer research, I think you would have a different perspective on the article.

Re: xAI, SpaceX, and the Race for AI Buildout

#88

Post by johnnyanmac »

basisword wrote: post #66
culi wrote: post #2

> In the latest example of corporations existing outside of the law, SpaceX (who is for some reason the controlling entity of xAI now) announced they'll be removing the illegal, unpermitted gas turbines they've been running at their Memphis Colossus data center... by July 2027. This is the thing the HN crowd doesn't seem to get whenever a post is on here about data centers. They are often times doing outright illegal…

>> The populist uprising against them is happening because people have tried everything else first From everything I've seen the populist uprising is happening because 99% of the people shouting don't know anything about data centers other than "bad".

When all they see is rising bills, louder environments, and less jobs: yes. all they know is "bad".

Re: xAI, SpaceX, and the Race for AI Buildout

#89

Post by BeetleB »

nearlyepic wrote: post #85
BeetleB wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then show me a pattern of flouting regulations (which I can easily believe he has). His terrible views on unrelated issues are irrelevant.

This is being needlessly pedantic. Disdain for the rights of other people does not start and end at literal written regulations. And yeah, on some level it's not strictly relevant to the exact legal question being discussed, but part of the purpose of an article is to give you reasons to give a shit about what's being reported.

> but part of the purpose of an article is to give you reasons to give a shit about what's being reported.

And this is where the article is trying to bias the readers.

As I said elsewhere: If this article was "Elon Musk is a shitty guy, and look at all the shitty stuff he does", I'd have no objection to any of this. Present all the examples, make the case, and let the reader decide.

But showing someone violating the law, and then pointing out possible other unrelated violations, you're trying to bias the reader.

If this were on trial and I were on the jury, and the prosecutor used such tactics, I'd be biased against the prosecution. There's a very good reason defense attorneys get judges to rule that such stuff can not be presented to the jurors.

Re: xAI, SpaceX, and the Race for AI Buildout

#90

Post by JeremyNT »

maerF0x0 wrote: post #31
utopiah wrote: post #6

Who cares, Musk will soon solve also those pesky problems by putting data centers in space, it is easy. Also next year FSD but for real this time. /s

solely about the FSD part of your comment. I got a chance to ride in a 2024 edition of the system this year and I was shocked at how good it was. Was it level 5? of course not. But from my very lay understanding of level 3 it seemd to have achieved all that I would have assumed a computer could reasonably do.

> Was it level 5? of course not.

You realize there are fully autonomous waymo cabs operating at "level 4" in several regions... today. Anybody can download the app and ride in them now.

Google didn't go around promising this "next year" every year for the last decade. They just went out and did the work to make the product work, and released it.

Post reply on HN