overpopulation is not measured by how many people you can pack into a telephone booth. Overpopulation in measured by how many people the Earth resources can support.

We began to consume more resources than what the Earth can provide decades ago, when the population was less than six billion people. Not just fossil fuels, we are consuming fresh water, arable land and forests in a non sustainable manner. The wild fish population in the sea reached an all time low and we are still overfishing. Fish farming accounts just for a small fraction of our consumption.

The alarms by the World watch and other institutes began in the '70s. Nonetheless the world population kept increasing and it is still increasing.

They are telling provocative things on purpose. It is needed to create the fake debate that traps the public between two falsehood.

The heated tones and the strong arguments are meant to enrage people, drag them into the battle and push them to take one side and accept the arguments of that side without a proper deep thinking.

This is what big business want. Did you have a look at what the media think about electric cars? They always show either Tesla or big electric SUV and they tell you that they are green. Big business want to sell big cars even if they require a lot more energy and materials to be manufactured, even if they consume a lot more energy when they are on the road, even if they take a lot more space on the road and in the parking lots.

The only chance we have that I see is the rapid development of fusion into a proper, usable power source,

Fusion is a marketing story to distract the attention. It is so difficult to realize a practical commercial fusion technology that it will not be available this century for sure.

In any case as I explained in the other comment the root cause is overpopulation. Solving the energy problems might mitigate for a while the situation, but it will not solve the situation. Famines, conflicts and mass migration will happen anyway.

famines, conflicts and mass migration

This will happen for sure and the cause is not just climate change. The cause is overpopulation and exhaustion of the Earth resources.

To get an idea of the cost choose any cloud service and see how much you pay for the server usage by the hour. Try to llok at all the other costs involved in the business, production of dedicated content is not cheap. All the company staff, the administration and the billing have a cost.

Do not go by assumptions, measure, try to get an idea of the real costs.

cause that shit had a litany of privacy and security issues

You don’t solve that by using another program. You try to reduce the damage by using the torrent client in a dedicated virtual machine and reset the machine to the original image at regular intervals.

I never used TikTok so I’m commenting on the assumption that now things are the same everywhere.

I can believe that there is a lot of manipulated content. But then when it comes to decide which content is manipulated and which isn’t most of the time the decision is the opposite of the truth, except for that content manipulated on purpose to provide the false alternative and trap the discussion between two falsehoods.

Make a search on Bing, then make a search on DuckDcukGo. Compare the results. You’ll find out that DuckDcukGo is just a front end for another site that provides links to business affiliates.

They let people believe that streaming is cheap, but it is not. A server can send streams to many people at the same time, but not so many as it seems and sever up time is a cost, in terms of energy and in terms of sysadmin time. Maintenance of the network is also expensive, especially in the US where most of the people live in low density neighbourhoods.

To that you have to add the cost of the big data servers that check everything people look at and profile their customers.

The dirty cheap subscriptions were meant to attract new customers, the service was heavily subsidized. The companies looked profitable just because other companies bought more ad space than necessary. Overadvertising is the preferred method to give stealth subsidies, but it is a cost for the other businesses of the network. After a while they have to shift those costs to the customers.

Is it a move to save money or a move to weaken the position of all those employees who objected to the questionable contracts with many intelligence agencies?

I can bet that they will ensure that the new employees will be selected among those who have no qualms.

A real self driving software must do a lot of things in parallel. Computer vision is just one of the many tasks it has to do. I don’t think that a single H100 will be enough. The fact that the current self driving vehicles did not use so many processing power doesn’t mean a lot, they are prototypes running in controlled environments or under strict supervision.

You assume that it will be either the self driving software in charge or the button pusher taking the wheel. You did not consider that the button pusher might have a foot on the brake, but instead of taking the wheel he might have to enter some commands.

Like the case where there is a road block ahead and the button pusher has to evaluate whether it is safe to move forward or not, but he wouldn’t take the wheel he would tell to the driving software where to go. In similar cases he would have to decide whether it is safe to pass aside an obstacle or stop there. Even in case of a burglar trying to get on board he would have to call the police and then give some commands to the driving software.

The idea at the base of the question is that in the future the AI or whatever you want to call it might be always in charge for the specialized functions, like calculating the right trajectory and turning the wheel, while the human will be in charge to check the surrounding environment and evaluate the situation. So the Ai is never supposed to be deactivated, in that case the truck would stop until the maintenance team arrives.

A serious self driving vehicle must be able to see around with different sensors. But then it must have a lot of computing power on board to merge different streams of data coming from different sensor. That adds up to the computing power required to make a proper prediction of the trajectories of dozen of other objects moving around the vehicle. I don’t know about the latest model, but I knew that the google cars few years ago had the boot occupied by big computers with several CUDA cards.

That’s not something you can put in a commercial car sold to the public, what you get is a car that relies only on one camera to look around and has a sensor in the bumper that cuts the engine if activated, but it does not create an additional stream of data. Maybe that there is a second camera looking down at the line on the road, but the data stream is not merged to the other, it is used to adjust the driving commands. I don’t even know if the little onboard computer they have is able to computes the trajectories of all the objects around the car. Few sensors and little processing power, that is not enough, it is not a self driving car.

When Tesla sells a car with driving assistance they tell to the customer that their car is not a self driving car, but they fail to explain why, where is the difference. How big is the gap. That’s one of the reasons why we had so many accidents.

Similar post earlier.

It starts from the same news, but taking the idea from the book in the link it asks something different.

Does your office have a choice or have they been caught in the permanent obsolescence game? Often one single professional app that provides new versions only for W11 does the trick.

It seems that permanent obsolescence is beginning to cost too much for the users. I hope they will all keep dragging their feet, but will be a tough fight because friendly providers of professional tools will keep releasing the new versions only for Windows 11, eventually they will force some to upgrade.

In that case, would they be paid as skilled drivers or button pushers?