63000 acres is about 98 square miles, so about a 10 mile by 10 mile area. Pretty sure this isn't 'destroying wildlife' levels of destruction, but yes, definitely ecosystem influencing. Compared to current alternatives (gas/coal/hydro), this may have less impact overall. Nuclear power should be invested in, but may take more time.
Come on now, Nevada is only 110,000 square miles. This solar planet would have taken up 0.089% of the state. All for a power plant that would have to be torn up in as little as 25 years.
If you want to learn more about good system design at an abstract level (not just online), cannot recommend Systemantics[1] by John Gall enough. I wish all engineers get an opportunity to read it.
I found this article [1] and the one from November from Ben, very educational on understanding motivation. However, putting it in practice is a very different thing.
From [1]:
_That is because the structure of the world economy — choices made starting with Bretton Woods in particular, and cemented by the removal of tariffs over time — made them nonviable. Say what you will about the viability or wisdom of Trump’s tariffs, the motivation — to undo eighty years of structural changes — is pretty straightforward!_
>>> US wants nothing to do with China. As the biggest consumer economy in the world, the have that right.
Yes, they have the right, but it doesn’t mean this is the right way. Consumers don’t suddenly stop consuming, and factories in the world don’t immediately start producing. This is like a slow flywheel; had we been almost spinning and ready to jump, it would make sense. This is not that.
Also, China is a super power which controls more than factories today. I agree they need to be checked, but sudden changes are not the way. I wish we did it by building trust with allies and then pushing China. Right now, even our allies are wary of us.
Haven’t seen the series yet, but I do have some exposure to the underlying problem.
Online bullying and social media pressure are real issues that cannot be ignored. At home, we tackle it by appropriate parental controls, education, and transparency. However , we are privileged to have the time, money, and awareness, for this to happen.
I genuinely feel we need some generic change, somewhere, (I don’t have answers) to incentivize companies to do the right thing to discourage continuous engagement and also build the right set of judgement skills needed by teens to navigate online social space.
It probably starts at home and perhaps an online social media class in school.
Parents could of course give their children locked-down devices, that can only access a whitelisted set of websites, enforce time limits on use, and possibly filter content. Such software, in so much as it doesn't already exist, could be made very user-friendly to the parents, and come with decent defaults, so that even parents without the "time, money, and awareness" could benefit. Those with those privileges could of course customize the filters to their liking. This software could even be government-funded, so that they get to "do something".
But then they would not have an excuse to expand online surveillance and censorship.
Force people to be anonymous and not share too much data with these platforms. Create privacy protections that do shield users from being exploited by said platforms and regulate advertisers thoroughly.
Being anonymous usually helps a lot against bullying and yet I doubt that is in the interest of online saviors in our political class.
It does seem though that this legacy-cloud-pocket-innovation combination continues to work without slowing down. It also what was said for Microsoft 15 years ago too (not really much different from IBM..), which is correct from one perspective, but not turning out true from revenue, market cap, growth terms.
My thinking is that Lindy Effect runs strong in a lot of Big Tech, and with deep pockets, they can afford to not be innovators but build moats on existing frameworks.
How does one define an AI powerhouse? If its building models, a smart business wouldn't bank on that alone. There is no moat.
If the definition of an AI Powerhouse is more about the capability to host models and process workloads, Amazon (the other company missing in that list) and Microsoft are definitely them.
Can you recommend some social apps from China that we may have not paid attention to? I’m assuming there’s a list more than ‘RedNote’. I tried using WeChat but it’s not where my network hangs, unfortunately.
You probably know some that have enough non-China presence.
You almost fooled me with the sarcasm. I am concerned with how many folks in this thread have massive sympathy for China. No doubt the West has had many issues and continues to do so but China is getting painted here as the bastion of freedom and openness. That they trust a Chinese app more than Meta when it’s absolutely worse in mainland then the lives they have in the West.
with china wysiwyg, with USA you believe you have freedom of ____ (you don’t) and you believe “US-owned” (X is not, hence the quotes) social media is in any way “net positive” for its citizens…
No doubt the West has had many issues and continues to do so
This … you are right in that West has issue … where you are wrong is that the issues are just as dangerous (if not A LOT more) than China. I quoted “US-owned” cause one of the biggest social media platforms that everyone considers “West” is owned by an African
Completely fictional but amusing dialogue "No lonny I can't make them sell you tiktok anymore, our dark lord and comrade used it to help get me elected and that requires tittat for tiktok. Besides, the name Tox was a bit too on the nose don't you think?"
