Legend2440

That's what the comment section is for!

Cloud computing is really a money printer right now. Amazon makes more from AWS than from their retail business, it's nearly 2/3rds of their profit.

The only poll that matters is the one on election day.

You can just make a mockup in whatever tool you want, and pour your 'art' and 'soul' into that.

Then hand it to the LLM and it'll make CSS to match.

>Many of this the AI can never imagine and won't reach by itself without human assist.

Are you sure about that? It looks like artificial neural networks can, in principle, do anything biological neural networks can do.

I think it's more likely the opposite: there are steps we could never reach without computer assist.

> I used Inception v3 pretrained on everyday photographs and then fine-tuned all layers on 68,011 dermoscopic and clinical images from the ISIC Archive on a single H100 GPU.

>These 200 test lesions, and every other photograph of the same lesion or patient, were removed from its data (including the validation set) before training, so it had never seen them, and they were not used to choose the model or set its threshold.

This is just benchmaxxing. A benchmaxxed model will always beat an unbenchmaxxed model, but it will be brittle.

You can always beat a specific dataset with a small model by finetuning on a train/test split. But it doesn't generalize well to 'wild' images, because they are out-of-domain.

If AI didn't exist, he'd find some other excuse to do the exact same thing.

The real reason for this is that Elon Musk is a conservative megadonor, while academics are vocally opposed to Trump. He takes from his enemies and gives to his friends; that's how he operates.

I think this is completely unrelated.

This administration thinks science is 'woke' because it says things that disagree with him. Many of these funding cuts were explicitly politically motivated, e.g. they specifically targeted research about diversity, gender, or vaccines.

It's not about AI, it's about removing funding from liberal causes and giving it to conservative causes.

We are not close to done building things, and the existing infrastructure is not enough.

We need both new infrastructure (like high-speed rail and apartment blocks) and new types of infrastructure (like datacenters).

>A datacentre is not valuable to anyone other than the owner.

Ah, that is a misunderstanding of economics. It's valuable to everyone who uses AI; the owner captures only part of the value. It's just like a how a factory is valuable to everyone who buys their products.

Trees are cool, but we need infrastructure and fields and cities and many other things too. We're going to have to cut down some trees to make space for them.

Because no one did anything illegal, or even unethical.

And they're doing something valuable to society by developing undeveloped land.

Well, it is the biggest trend in tech right now.

Someday there will be other trends, but it's currently AI's turn.

Law firms are cautious about AI tools, they got burned a couple years ago by hallucinated citations.

Citing made-up cases sure looks like lying to the court, which is a punishable offense. Lawyers have been sanctioned, fined, and in one case received a 30-day license suspension.

I think there is a large group of commenters who actually just hate silicon valley tech companies, and they're fine with AI as long as it comes from someone else.