It’s great this debate is happening. The people on hn are some of those that can make a real impact here. There are many parallels with the industrial revolution here but we really don’t want to repeat a over a century of misery that occurred after that era. If we don’t want the world to be run be a tiny group of trillionaires, some action needs to be taken now

You'll find that vast majority, working at FAANG and hyperscalers, are pretty fine with the status quo. The tech oligarchy didn't form in a vacuum.

I disagree. No one will want to use second rate models when the frontier models reach a specific level of capability. Enterprise will keep paying.

No one? When free means I get 95% of the capabilities of something very very expensive, you bet your bottom dollar many many people will choose free.

But its not free.

not every company can pay for the best engineers in the market, some can only afford to pay for cheaper engineers and it's fine

same with models.

Considering the economic angle, one possible long term future is that access to frontier models is only realistic for the wealthiest 1% They will use this access to the ultra intelligent models to increase their wealth further. Inequality will continue to be negatively impacted

Search engines are good for finding shops, but not individual items. There also aren't many shops that are dedicated to only tall, usually big and tall instead.

I don't know how good AI is at these kinds of tasks, but I can tell you that it's not easy manually, especially in some parts of the world where you might have to factor in shipping/return costs.

You’re quite correct and we are likely going to stumble into this future despite all the very big brains working on these technologies (including people on hn).

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.”

It’s odd because so many researchers and so many people who are far better engineers than me, can’t see it. I don’t even think it’s the salary for most- it’s just techno-optimist horse blinders, reading assured utopia at the top of an exponential graph.

The credit card companies really missed the boat here to become the standard for consumer to consumer payments. Of course, from their perspective, they know that people would not accept having to pay for this service so the companies won’t go near it.

I am reaching for “reader mode” in my browsers all the time as they cut through these design choices that don’t agree within my eyes

It really helps to focus in the content rather than the fluff.

I should probably be doing this instead of fruitlessly expanding my blocklist. I'm frustrated that extensions don't work in reader view though.

It would have been a success if they just called it ipv5.

That’s not true. The true capture price of nuclear is much higher https://green-giraffe.com/publication/blog-post/what-capture...

That link is pretty silly:

> So nuclear plants, by and large, get the market price whenever they produce (which is most of the time) and this does not equal the average price as they will be producing a higher share of total production at times of low demand (and low prices), and a smaller share of total production at times of high demand (and high prices).

The assumption here is that the price is set by only demand rather than the combination of supply and demand. Under that false assumption, generating power when demand is lower (i.e. at night) is bad. But how much solar generation is there at night, and what does that change in supply do to prices if you make solar a higher percentage of the grid?

It does the oppose of this:

> whilst the capture price for solar is often higher than the average price (thanks to power demand generally being higher during the day)

Because solar generates only during the day, in order to supply power with solar at night, you would need it to oversupply power during the day and then pay extra for storage to resolve the undersupply it leaves at night. So once you have a certain amount of solar, you end up with lower prices during the day, when solar is generating a higher proportion of the power, and higher prices after sunset.

And solar is double screwed by this. Not only does it get the soon-to-be-lower daytime prices for all of its output rather than half, its output is further regionally correlated, so that on sunny days when its output is highest, even the daytime price is lower than it is on cloudy days, because higher or lower solar output is a cause of lower or higher prices, i.e. the daytime price anti-correlates with its output.

Your post is completely orthogonal to the point I made and also fails to account for the fact that distributed renewables have enormous capex cost in the form of transmission and storage that we just disregard. Building a nuke plant on a major transmission route doesn't require any of that.

You're arguing against a point nobody made

"The average capacity factor for the French nuclear fleet has been, due to the optimised management of production," - lol, lmao even. Optimized management in france? Check out how much their refuel outages take vs in US and say that again