Depends entirely on the numbers and whether those resources are scarce in that place. If the datacenter ends up funding the expansions, and then the community make a profit every month forerever on supplying those utilities, it's a win.

"Past performance is no guarantee of future returns" applies to any recorded dataset.

Not to recorded datasets, particularly. For example, that's the reason to think the sun will rise tomorrow morning - it always has.

When I think about AM radio now, I think about how Alex Jones was successfully sued for $99 bazillion for saying AM radio stuff. Where I grew up, Rush was always to be found on a channel or two.

Depends on "your idea" - was it exclusively yours, does it even constitute an "idea" by that point? I took a tour of Motorola and made a pre-service-launch phone call on Iridium in 1998. SatComms hasn't been an "idea" for many decades, it's a big area that advances with thousands of new ideas every year.

Any reason to disbelieve it or the benefits? Or just emotionally-centered anti-AI-sentiment?

Well if people are successfully blocking data center construction, their objections are a 'factual' problem for big tech. But people are just going to switch to complaining about blocking out the stars.

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fscholar.google.com%2Fsch... Cited by 260,963 Wow

In LLMs you usually use a parameter-specific learning rate algorithm (e.g. ADAM/W) that uses momentum (gradient history). https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdev.to%2Fshrsv%2Fadam-and-...

That's the point, it's getting hard to find specific thinking tasks / games at which AI doesn't dominate people. Now there is one fewer known example.

Save that a single human putting in actual effort can't turn out several dozen PRs a day, every day. That throttles the PR volume to a manageable level for the maintainers.

The answer is a simple "No.". Don't allow them. The vast majority will fail to meet reasonable criteria for acceptance, which is enough of a reason to reject them. For the rest, even if they're acceptable in terms of quality, the sheer cost of reviewing every pull request in detail and sorting the minority of acceptable requests from the swamp of slop will itself damage the project, diverting maintainer time away from feature work and fixing bugs, badly enough that it's not worth it. I think this sums it up nicely:

Why should I spend my time reading something you didn't care enough about to spend time writing?

I just wanted to let you know that you have successfully driven me off of /., after some 25 years.

Not just you, obviously, the site has been in steep decline for a long time, but you were such a huge asshole that you managed to be the last straw. So, congrats for that. I won't be back.

More like 99.99%. Maybe need some more nines in there. Large C codebases without regular critical CVEs are basically nonexistent.

What bankruptcy-prevention actions are they asking for?

Is that on top of the 30% federal tax credit?