Womble

ok, but running a hairdryer for 5 minutes is well up into the hundreds of queries which is more than the vast majority of people will use in a week. The post I replied to was talking about it being 1-2% of energy usage, so that includes transport, heating and heavy industry. It just doesnt pass the smell test to me that something where a weeks worth of usage is exceeded by a person drying their hair once is comparable with such vast users of energy.

Do you have a source for that? Because given a chatgpt query takes a similar amount of energy to running a hair dryer for a few seconds i find it hard to believe.

It would make a lot more sense nowadays for Europe/NA to east Asia (or would for Europe if Russia were a reasonable country that could be trusted to fly over).

Thank you for posting this, I've tried to say the same thing to people quite a few times but to roughly the same reaction as this post has got. Its an entirely emotional reaction, people have convinced themself that AI is bad (arguable) therefore anything bad said about them is true (incorrect).

Unlike those lovely communists who frequently actively worked with the nazis (until '35) in order to weaken the social democrats and whos leader explicitly said "after Hitler, our turn". Much better eh comrade?

It wont do anything of the sort. Even if you accept the premise that somehow artists are being exploited from learning from their previous works, all that will happen is the AI companies will shift out of America to a juristiction that doesnt value extracting rents from IP above all else.

It was meant to protect creators ability to earn from what they produce for a while so that they would be encouraged to create and share with the world.

I think we both agree that the current copyright regime is not doing this. But I fail to see how expanding the rights of rightsholders to dictate how you use the works that you have acquired (which is what this suite is over) doesnt just make that issue worse. I would much prefer to see copyrights drastically slashed from the absurd semi-perpetual system that the USA has pushed on the world and things move into the public realm after a decade or two, without doing that giving people who inherited or bought the rights over a work completed a centrury ago the legal power to say "you cannot read this work in a way we dont like" is abhorent.

The bit that picture leave out is that first guy is almost certainly killed, as are a good few of those in the third panel. Thats what makes it difficult.

Just so we're clear, the problem is that people are driven to suicide because of draconian punishment of copyright infringment, not that it isnt happening to people we dont like. Right?

For all those cheering on the copyright mafia going after Anthropic, consider that some of the groups supporting anthropic against this massive overreach of "we get to decide how you use our works" include:

• Authors Alliance
• the Electronic Frontier Foundation
• American Library Association
• Association of Research Libraries
• Public Knowledge

Maybe this is not such a great thing?

You could even do district heating. Use the hot water output from the data centre and sell it cheap for piping into appartment blocks for heating.

Its an urban planning and transport issue essentially. Medium density housing (think 4-6 story blocks) allows enough people to live in an area that it becomes feasible to have trams/light rail serving that area.