> The power required would be the same as that provided by the bunker fuel engines in common use
And that is a lot of power! Emma Mærsk has an engine output around 80-90MW.
The largest off shore wind turbine today is 26MW with a rotor diameter north of 300m/1000ft(!!). Common (modern) offshore wind turbines today are about 10-15MW with rotor diameters of ~220m/720ft.
I will not conclude it is impossible at this end of the scale, but you need a huge foil area to match such engine output.
I am a European, so may be wrong, but it is my understanding that Indians have intuition around lakhs (100k) instead of thousands/millions. Apparently 100 lakhs is a crore (10M), but I haven’t seen that used so don’t know how prevalent it is - lakh is very commonly used though.
Python gets forked in other investment banks as well. I wouldn’t say that is evidence of any deficiencies, rather they just want to deal with their own idiosyncrasies.
I think you are right that fingerprints are much easier to read and compare. I do believe it is for matching against images from social media, driver’s license, passports etc.
The government likely has pictures of many more people than they have fingerprints of.
I thought this too, but it seems that is not the case. I could not remember the reason I saw why so I googled it (AI excerpt).
Large Language Models (LLMs) are not perfectly deterministic even with temperature set to zero
, due to factors like dynamic batching, floating-point variations, and internal model implementation details. While temperature zero makes the model choose the most probable token at each step, which is a greedy, "deterministic" strategy, these other technical factors introduce subtle, non-deterministic variations in the output
Not that it's incorrect but there is some data showing variability even with the very same input and all parameters. Especially if we have no control over the model behind the API with engineering optimizations etc.
See Berk Atil et al.: Non-Determinism of "Deterministic" LLM Settings, https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.04667v5
Ignoring that you are making an assumption about how the randomness is handled, this is a very vacuous definition of "deterministic" in the context of the discussion here, which is AI controlling large and complex systems. The fact that each inference can be repeated if and only if you know and control the seed and it is implemented with a simple PRNG is much less important to the conversation than its high level behavior, which is nondeterministic in this application.
If your system is only deterministic if it processes its huge web of interconnected agentic prompts in exactly the same order, then its behavior is not deterministic in any sense that could ever be important in the context of predictable and repeatable system behavior. If I ask you whether it will handle the same task the same exact way, and its handling of it involves lots of concurrent calls that are never guaranteed to be ordered the same way, then you can't answer "yes".
The LLMs most of us are using have some element of randomness to every token selected, which is non-deterministic. You can try to attempt to corral that, but statistically, with enough iteration, it may provide nonsense, unintentional, dangerous, opposite solutions/answers/action, even if you have system instructions defining otherwise and a series of LLMs checking themselves. Be sure that you fully understand this. Even if you could make it fully deterministic, it would be deterministic based on the model and state, and you’ll surely be updating those. It amazes me how little people know about what they’re using.
> Many countries have <40 hours/week and are still thriving.
May I have the list of such countries with a level of prosperity comparable to the US (which seriously consider an $85k tax-free minimum wage)?
Your "everything is still thriving" on paper turns out to be "everyone except the elite is drowning in poverty and they can't complain about it because then their totalitarian government will declare them terrorists or something" in practice. All the time.
You may be right about some parts of Europe, but I think you would be surprised just how prosperous at least the northern part is, despite sub-40 hour work weeks and comparatively high taxes, 5-6 weeks paid vacation and “socialist” politics.
California is the only state I’ve visited in the US, but I would say Scandinavians are wealthier on average/higher quality of life.
> 5-6 weeks paid vacation and “socialist” politics
I'm not even surprised.
Socialist politics are extremely good at ensuring a high standard of living for the elite and shutting everyone else up. Look at any North Korean media outlet (of two or however many) - they're the best in the world, and everyone else is envious of them.
Are you under the impression that North Korea is an actual socialist country? Just because it's in the name it does not make it so. I thought history thought us the lesson about that.
> Socialist politics are extremely good at ensuring a high standard of living for the elite and shutting everyone else
European social democratic politics are usually characterized by the opposite outcome, where high taxes and redistribution means the top 10% is much closer to the average Joe than in ultra capitalist countries. Less inequality in general.
> Look at any North Korean media outlet
If you seriously compare NK to any country in Europe, you have no clue, sorry.
No. Look at the median salary of a full-time worker in Europe and compare it to the US. They are drowning in poverty.
> top 10% is much closer to the average Joe
No. In the US top 10% full-time workers get you what? About 300k? It is way closer to the average US Joe than Europe has it's top 10% to their average poor workers. There is more inequality in Europe than in the US.
> If you seriously compare NK to any country in Europe, you have no clue, sorry.
Why? Because you chose to trust European propaganda and not North Korean propaganda? Ask those who chose to trust North Korean propaganda what they'd tell you.
Notably EU countries don’t produce as many large or global software products. I know they have some companies of renown but not to the degree the US does.
There may or may not be a connection to work habits, but we should find out and then decide if we’re okay with the consequences (like the lowest GDP per capita state (AL) being on par with Germany). Maybe we’re okay with playing second fiddle. But we should know what we’re in for.
I think real reason is less willingness to make massive bets on everything. In ZIRP environment that played out great on paper. But we really have to see how will it do with AI...
Denmark has 37 hours/week. Netherlands is around 32-33 on average AFAIK. Switzerland is ~35 hours/week. Ireland and Austria are also well below 40 to my knowledge.
Most research shows that non-mechanical work (i.e. where you have to think a little), gets a lower work-output above 40 hours/week than below. If sustained, it’s not just diminishing returns, but lower absolute output, even at just 3-5hours weekly overtime.
Sorry, I am not Swiss myself, so I may be completely mistaken.
I read that the average working hours is ~31/week. Digging further into that, it was the number of actual working hours on average (including part time and self-employeds), not what constitutes full-time employment.
Fair enough. Once you get into actual hours worked, you have a lot of people working less than FTE numbers by quite a bit.
For example, once the maternity leave runs out, in finance a lot of couples go to 80% so that with 1-2 days of home office you can always have someone watching the child. It's less money but the nurseries are so crazy expensive in Switzerland that it can actually even be positive in terms of total (edit:net) income.
I am not sure if we are in disagreement, but I believe my point stands: that Switzerland is a rich country despite working less than 40 hours/week on avg (actual hours).
In Norway 40 hours is the maximum legally allowable (other than temporary overtime), most people have 37,5 hour work week. If one in addition count vacation days etc the difference between other countries and the US might be even starker, in total hours per year?
> Many countries have <40 hours/week and are still thriving.
But it's a fiction built on U.S. force projection. It's become apparent that none of these countries could defend themselves against an aggressive competitor.
Well you are comparing a single country of over 300 million (the US) with the countries in the EU that are on average 16-17 million. Do you think that makes sense?
Idk historically some European nations like Germany have been very successful at least at starting wars and people had their hands pretty full trying to defeat them.
I don’t think their past WW2 docility can be attributed to their inability at doing heavy industry or weapons development
You probably know already, but ICE cars only convert about 20–30% of fuel energy into motion, while EVs are often +90% efficient. So when an EV has to work harder (extra battery weight or colder weather), you notice the drop in range more.
In an ICE, the same load is less visible because most energy gets wasted as heat. This is also why cold weather seems to affect EV range more.
> You probably know already, but ICE cars only convert about 20–30% of fuel energy into motion, while EVs are often +90% efficient. So when an EV has to work harder (extra battery weight or colder weather), you notice the drop in range more.
There's a kernel of truth here in that Otto engines suffer lower efficiency at part load, however I suspect the real reason is that gas car range is "good enough" and refilling is fast, so one doesn't tend to obsess about remaining range.
> This is also why cold weather seems to affect EV range more.
That's because a) some batteries suffer degraded performance at low temperature, and b) ICE cars use the plentiful waste heat for cabin heating whereas an EV needs a heat pump or even resistive heating of the cabin air.
> That's because a) some batteries suffer degraded performance at low temperature, and b) ICE cars use the plentiful waste heat for cabin heating whereas an EV needs a heat pump or even resistive heating of the cabin air.
You are making my point here actually. Combustion engines suffer from the exact same, but because they waste so much energy as heat already, less “extra” energy needs to be spent on that.
I don't think there's a contradiction here. Electric cars suffer degraded range when it's cold (in part) because they're so much more efficient that they don't produce enough waste heat to heat the cabin. And batteries are so much less energy dense than diesel and gasoline that the extra power draw reduces their range to a meaningful degree.
Yes heating impacts range in an EV, but it's not really an efficiency thing, it's because you can't get it "free". If an ICE didn't let you harness the heat, you'd see a similar percent drop in range.
And for extra weight, it's just not true. Making a motor work 10% harder at 90% efficiency, compared to making an engine work 10% harder at 20% efficiency, both of these are going to reduce your range by 9%.
The unexpected benefit which I've noticed when switching from a small, light car to a heavier, medium EV car is that the latter doesn't drive/feel any worse when fully loaded. Makes the trips that much more pleasant.
> You do realize that none of those ships could get into any port, right?
Container ships sail under bridges all the time. Check YouTube for videos of this or just Google it if you want proof.
reply