This is the war that’s coming.

More and more processes are automatic, and AI is now breaking down the last holdout of “manual” jobs.

How will that future, where only a small percentage of mankind actually needs to work, look like? It could be heaven, but it’s shaping up to be hell unless we win these fights.

There are stark differences between the scenarios you’re presenting, but going to the core of your point, is it even legal to paint a photorealistic nude?

I don’t know of any court cases about this specific subject, but I remember when Rush painted Tiger Woods (“The masters at Augusta”), he was sued.

He got away with not having to pay money to Tiger Woods, but partly because it’s a stylized painting and it pushed towards first amendment rights. This wouldn’t work in a photorealistic depiction, so it seems highly unlikely that such a painting would be OK…

“I haven’t donated $45m”.

He could have donated 50m, so I’d take it with a grain of salt until the fillings are actually public

Are you daft? Why do you think it has TWO wings and TWO doors? And clearly you’ve never been invited to the under cock pit, where they keep plugs fit for any hole.

(is joke don’t bite)

I don’t think they have anything against America specifically. They just seem to want to cash in as much as possible, which is fairly standard for politicians in general.

Seems like the big difference is that they’re increasingly able to get away with stuff that would have otherwise ended their political career or straight up put them behind bars…

What.

The article says that, for the GPUs, they can have a “maximum power draw of 45,000 W at full tilt”.

The 28 million W comes from the full system, and surely the massive displays, LEDs and eventually sound system makes up the bulk of that, the gfx cards are a rounding error…

It could be argued that the Congress is overstaffed, going by productivity metrics.

That’s a title for a blog post, not a news article.

Which is fascinating, because it actually reads like a proper news article. I didn’t fact check it, but I’m going with the assumption that the writer isn’t terrible and it’s the editor who came up with the title.

Or they just ripped it off an actual news source.

This.

Also, tie together more countries’ power grids to even out production and demand of renewables, and reduce the need for other backup sources.

For a fraction of the cost of nuclear, increase the storage capacity as well. We’ve had days where the price per MWh was negative in many hours, because of excess production.

The barriers to carbon free energy aren’t technical, they’re purely political.

So the innovation that was patented is literally “cut it partway through”.

Patents are inherently stupid and only serve to stifle progress. Change my mind or otherwise just downvote away, works as well.

People here be discussing the wrong thing, or am I the only one thinking that patenting a roll of paper is incredibly stupid?

It’s a damn roll of paper. How much of a genius do you have to be to come up with that? People have been doing it for millennia, the only difference is that it used to be so expensive that no one would think of whipping their butts with it.

Data privacy AND not having to deal with more bullshit AI? Oh my, how will we ever cope with this… /s

We’ve come full circle

I feel the same about his wife too!