FaceDeer

The companies that continue with human staff where others are replacing theirs, for example. Outsourcers providing those staff.

Depends entirely on the circumstances of where it does end up being built. I’m not sure what “gotcha” you think you’re making here? That Reddit comment is just me pointing out that when a business uses electricity they pay for it.

So it’ll be built somewhere else. Data moves around quite easily.

That’s not how bankruptcy works. The investors don’t get their money back.

The original comment that this subthread descends from was about the profitability of AI companies.

And the type of RAM and “GPU”'s being manufactured are not ones that normal consumers will use.

They’re using the same foundries that would make those things. I’m not saying that there’ll be a flood of “used” equipment (though there would indeed be some of that too, other companies could set up data centers much more cheaply), I’m saying that the foundries will switch back to consumer products.

The stock is worth a lot because it can be sold for a lot. If the manufacturers don’t think the AI companies will stick around they should be selling the stock they’re receiving from them. It’s money either way. What do you think they’re doing with that money?

People have different opinions.

You literally just said you held both.

Thus, by a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak.

Where’s this infinite well of investment money coming from? “Economic magic” is pretty vague.

Which is pouring money into the manufacturers of those things. If you’re convinced the AI companies are going to collapse then just wait a little and you’ll get all those things way cheaper than they were before.

Then invest in competitors, they’ve got a more flexible timeframe.

So what’s the problem? This looks self-correcting to me, if none of the AI companies are profitable then they’re going to go away. Short their stock and make a fortune.

Don’t worry, the Internet keeps telling me that AI is a useless stochastic parrot that hallucinates everything it says anyway.

One of my happy imaginings is that perhaps someday my AI simulant will be in a museum somewhere getting to chat with whatever entities descend from us to compare and contrast how things are now with how they are whenever that is.

AI is a technology being developed and deployed by millions of people and thousands of corporations, across a huge number of countries. Users can probably be counted in the hundreds of millions now. Which ones’ “end goal” is this?

It’s been darkly amusing watching the various social media hive-minds that used to be all for the concept of “information wanting to be free” suddenly discovering that they hate AI more than they love freedom of information.

This is exactly why I’ve been recording personal logs and saving archives of all of my digital interactions for over a decade already. Going to make one of these for myself at some point using local models.

They laughed, called me mad. Well who’s mad now?

Is it really an “unreliable source”, though? The owner of the site is acting maliciously with regards to this DDOS, of course, but that doesn’t necessarily mean he’s going to act maliciously about the contents of archive.today itself.

One could make the case that the owner of archive.today was already flagrantly flouting copyright law, and therefore a criminal, and therefore “unreliable” right from the get-go. Let’s not leap to conclusions here.

I think that’d go pretty far beyond Wikimedia’s mandate, but having something whose purpose was specifically archiving just the sources for their articles would be pretty awesome.