eh, the entireity of training GPT4 and the whole world using it for a year turns out to be about 1% of the gasoline burnt just by the USA every single day. Its barely a rounding error when it comes to energy usage.
The articles point was that markdown (or other similar utf-8 text based documents) is the best guarantee you have for the files being usable into the indefinite future. As you get into the complicated formats of things like word processors the less likely that format will be meaningfully usable in 10,20,50 years time, good luck reading a obsolete word processor file from the 80s today.
No I'm not, I'm just not assuming immigrants have 0 buying power, which your post implicitly was. Yes supply increases but demand also increases. Beyond that you get into the realms of having to do empirical research as to which is more (which is difficult).
So by going harder on blocking content that China? Because that's what they do but most of the big providers get through after a day or two of downtime each time the government make a change to block them.
Inertial confinement doesnt produce a "stable reaction" it is pulsed by it's nature, think of it in the same way as a single cylinder internal combustion engine, periodic explosions which are harnessed to do useful work. So no the laser energy is required every single time to detonate the fuel pellet.
NIF isnt really interested in fusion for power production, it's a weapons research facility that occasionally puts out puff pieces to make it seem like it has civilian applications.
Let me try with another example that can get round your blind AI hatred.
If people were using a calculator to calculate the value of an integral they would have significantly less diversity of results because they were all using the same tool. Less diversity of results has nothing to do with how good the tool is, it might be 100% right or 100% wrong but if everyone is using it then they will all get the same (or similar if it has a random element to it as LLMs do).
Imagine the AI was 100% perfect and gave the correct answer every time, people using it would have a significantly reduced diversity of results as they would always be using the same tool to get the correct same answer.
People using an ai get a smaller diversity of results is neither good nor bad its just the way things are, the same way as people using the same pack of pens use a smaller variety of colours than those who are using whatever pens they have.
They in fact often have word and page limits and most journal articles I've been a part of have had a period at the end of cutting and trimming in order to fit into those limits.
There was also a Harvard paper that was the main justification for austerity in the UK given its conclusion that past a certain GDP/debt ratio al sorts of bad things happen.
Turned out to be an excel error skipping 1/4 of their data and when re-run with the whole set the effect vanished.
Horrible abuses of excel and csv files are by no means limited to any one country.
Its nice that you inform people that they cant tell if something is saving them time or not without knowing what their job is or how they are using a tool.
If you want to be like that then "people" love trump and musk everywhere and its not unique to the UK. Saying "people here love trump and musk" when for example 55% of people in the UK have a "very unfavourable" opinion of him is very misleading. More people are very unfavourable than unfavourable, neutral, favourable very favourable and don't know put together.
eh, the entireity of training GPT4 and the whole world using it for a year turns out to be about 1% of the gasoline burnt just by the USA every single day. Its barely a rounding error when it comes to energy usage.