I'm hoping that the new Snapdragon X2 Elite based laptops coming out this year will beat it. Qualcomm seems to have been trying to upstream driver support for them earlier than the X1. Then it's up to what kinds of laptops OEMs offer with them.
Personally I'd still just get a used ThinkPad X13s Gen 1 on eBay at this point if I were going to buy another one today because they're available for around $400, and I don't see anything better that's passively cooled, with great battery life, and great Linux support available at the moment. I hope there will be a better, faster alternative in the near future. I'd gladly upgrade.
This is interesting take, because it also solves a common issue whereas all agents try to optimize for the same thing: their rewards will shift with changes to the environment, so in essence they will take different actions according to how each one perceives the environment and calculates rewards, and will thus take different actions.
> but movie making is also energy intensive - people, sets, cameras, shooting, rendering, editing, etc.
Do you have at least the order of magnitude for this? Does it also consume as much water as data centers? Has the entertainment industry ever needed to attract US$7T within 5 years to do what it does?
> “AI is supposed to help humanity advance faster and make humanity more productive.”
Is it? How? Will it really advance life or it is just a probability? Advance in what way, and why do you think being faster is better, and if better, better at what? If it is a probability, what exact number is it? What if it doesn’t happen in the way you think it will?
Do you have at least the order of magnitude for this? Does it also consume as much water as data centers? Has the entertainment industry ever needed to attract US$7T within 5 years to do what it does?
No I don't. But I wanted to call that out.
Is it? How? Will it really advance life or it is just a probability? Advance in what way, and why do you think being faster is better, and if better, better at what? If it is a probability, what exact number is it? What if it doesn’t happen in the way you think it will?
These are all decent questions. I don't have the answer. However, I do know that movies and shows are for entertainment. They do not enhance productivity.
Certain lobbyists like hiding the end-to-end aspects of nuclear and focus mostly on “energy density”, “clean operations” etc, because they take advantage of the fact most people think short term (because, well, it is simpler). It is like the fossil fuel lobbyists that say gas is cheaper but never mention the externalities caused by e.g., the air pollution causing health issues to those living nearby LNG plants, who end up paying for the costs, just not at the moment of operationalization. Of course none of these proponents live near these infrastructures. This is the very same old 60-90’s stories with the tobacco industry saying smoking have health benefits.
It hasn’t, it is actually showing the way forward for a more dynamic energy mix. Regressive is continuing with the same 150y fossil fuel receipt for energy despite continuous advances in various clean technologies. California has multiple natural issues with regular fires and dry air that makes energy management very expensive.
reply