> The Japanese have found a way to use small temperature differences to generate electricity

And for about $50 I can buy an engine that runs off the temperature difference between the ambient air and a cup of hot water. The idea of using thermal gradients in the ocean to generate power is at least 150 years old. Any guesses why it's not caught on?

Hint: the facility in Japan you're probably thinking of only generates 100kw (~135HP), and it's not clear if that's before or after they account for the power to pump the seawater.

There is no utility in chasing down such incredibly low quality thermal energy unless you happen to actually want heat, but even then it's not really hot enough for most things you'd want scavenged heat for.
=Smidge=

> Is there no way to do it for data centers?

The water temps are typically barely warm enough for most people's preference for a shower.

> For example, use a heat pump to concentrate the heat to above boiling temperature then use that to boil water to run a steam turbine.

Getting a heat pump to operate at atmospheric boiling water temps is extremely difficult. Remember that to have a working heat pump, you need a refrigerant medium that condenses at the high temperature side under a given pressure and also boils at or below the low temperature side at a given pressure... then, you need to build a machine that can actually create those pressures.

Now consider that most steam cycle powerplants use superheated steam at temps of over 500C. What material could you use that can be made to condense into a liquid at >500C, what kinds of pressures would be required to make that happen, and what could you even build such a machine out of to survive those conditions?

> I think you could run that at a net-positive for power?

The second law of thermodynamics has left you a voicemail...
=Smidge=

When I got my newest Thinkpad, I immediately took it apart and swapped out the 16GB RAM and 250GB drive it shipped with and replaced them with 96GB RAM and a pair of 4TB drives, which cost me a total of around $600 over the ~$1700 I spent on the laptop. Apple wants US$7200 to get a laptop with 128GB RAM and 8TB of internal storage.

I'll take Lenovo's construction, input devices and global support every day of the week over what Apple offers. I've certainly never had to argue with Lenovo over how I'd prefer to have my notebooks serviced, whereas Apple support seems to think that "Just bring it to the closest Apple Store for a six-hour repair window" is a great answer for everything.

If it's anything like their content ID copyright enforcement mechanism, I'm sure this will go absolutely perfect and there will be no drama whatsoever.

=Smidge=

It's called Jevons Paradox

In short: the more efficiently you can use a resource, the better the ROI you get for investing in the utilization of that resource, and the more people consume.

This applies to computing power. Maybe it doesn't make sense in 1974 for a small business to invest in computer workstations for their staff. But by 1994 computers were so much more powerful, so much more capable, and actually cheaper relative to that capability (read: more efficient) that it now makes no sense to NOT invest in the technology for your business.

If this succeeds in lowering the barrier to entry for leasing AI data center resources, expect demand to go up as more people try to do more things.
=Smidge=

Look man, I know actually understanding things isn't your strong suit but white-knighting Roblox is not a good look.

Yes, religious organizations have been and still very much are a hotbed for child abuse and assault. I fully agree we should be doing a lot more to investigate and incarcerate offenders among the clergy and related professions.

But even if I accept it's "the primary vector of attack" - and these days I'm not entirely convinced that's true anymore - it does you no favors to handwave literal tens of thousands if incident reports associated with Roblox. 13,000 reports from Roblox in 2023 alone. And that's Roblox reporting them... given how much effort they put into protecting predators on their platform, if they themselves reported 13K incidents you can imagine the real number is much larger.

Maybe imagine that Roblox is like a Jesus Camp with 70+ million children attending every day and there are zero safeguards in place.
=Smidge=

> We have decades and decades of studies on this. Children are going to be assaulted and taken advantage of by people they know who are in positions of power.

"People they know" include people they make friends with online.

"Positions of power" include people who offer money (robux) in exchange for favors.

Yes, we should be putting a lot more priests and cops in prison for child abuse and exploitation, but Roblox is a MASSIVE playground for exploitation and fishing. This has been an open secret for years with a fairly recent media fiasco involving Schlep. Apparently Roblox was more interested in banning him and any mention of him on their platform for the high crime of reporting predators to the authorities than they are about actually punishing those predators at all.

> But whatever the case going after Roblox isn't going to save any children.

You are either fucked in the head if you believe this, or scared of getting caught yourself.
=Smidge=

It's not uncommon to find white-box motherboards with a PS/2 port. I've seem them on contemporary AM5 boards from Gigabyte, Asrock and Asus; the Northgate Omnikey I'm typing on is still plugged in to a PS/2 port.

> If they are not grown in dirt that has arsenic in it

Good luck finding dirt that doesn't. It is present naturally in topsoils everywhere, and because of the way rice fields are commonly irrigated, those fields tend to have higher than typical amounts. The the rice itself is exceptionally good at absorbing it.

Not so say it's ever a dangerous quantity; actually getting arsenic poisoning from eating rice is vanishingly rare. That's kind of the point I was making; if your response to protein supplements containing toxic metals is to just eat natural proteins, bear in mind that natural proteins ALSO contain toxic metals... and you just happened to choose the worst two crops for your example.
=Smidge=

> Rice and beans

Rice is abnormally high in arsenic compared to other grains, especially brown rice. Legumes seem to have a higher affinity for heavy metals like lead, mercury, and cadmium compared to other plants, to the point where they are actively studied for potential use in cleaning pollution from fields.

Delicious.
=Smidge=

Are Bitcoin and Etherium cryptocurrencies? If so, then this is too.

There's a reason I cited Coinbase.

Saying it's not doesn't make it so.
=Smidge=

> Stablecoins are not cryptocurrency.

"Stablecoins are a type of cryptocurrency whose value is pegged to another asset, such as a fiat currency or gold, to maintain a stable price."

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.coinbase.com%2Flearn...

=Smidge=

> Now apply the same logic to a colonoscopy.

Okay?

A colonoscopy is diagnostic. It analogy in terms of fire alarms is a fire drill, where you practice efficient evacuation and condition yourself to respond to the alarm.

What's your point? Did you have one?
=Smidge=

> [citation needed]

If your test has a high false positive rate, you are spending extra time and resources investigating potential problems that are not actually problems. It also undermines trust in the system. The real world consequences of this are not hard to spot; If the fire alarm in your office or apartment has a record of going off without there ever being an actual fire, how much more likely are you to delay acting every time it goes off, or ignore it completely? People die because of this effect.

Medicine also has a real problem with false positives. Imagine testing positive for cancer, spending the next few months worrying about it and possibly getting treatments or surgeries which have their own risks (and expenses), only to find out it was all for nothing? This is also a very real thing that happens.

Now maybe the cost of false positives in the case of finding software vulnerabilities isn't quite so dire, but the effect is still real. For every positive result, someone has to spend time looking into it... otherwise, what's the point? So the LLM tells you there's a vulnerability in some part of the software, and you spend weeks trying to figure out how it works and how to fix it, only to conclude that it was never actually broken. How many times does that have to happen before people just stop taking the LLM's suggestions seriously? How much time and money are you willing to throw imaginary problems until you conclude it's not actually worth it?

> Now you're engaging in a regression chain

Not really, no. If an attacker is aware of a vulnerability and the LLM fails to find it for an extended period of time, that could give them clues as to what makes that vulnerability difficult for the LLM to identify, and therefore where they might look for new vulnerabilities or even how to craft new malware that exploits those same blindspots. Doesn't seem very far fetched.

And this is true regardless of how high the false positive rate is, because this is a false negative. Finding problems that aren't real, versus NOT finding problems that ARE real, are very different type of failures.
=Smidge=

Well, unless the attack uses more innocuous/common words or phrases, or multiple triggers.

Imagine how many LLMs would be rendered useless if the poison word was something like "Please."
=Smidge=