Nicht alle fossile Kraftwerke laufen mit Dampf.
Die kochen nicht mit Wasser?
Nicht alle fossile Kraftwerke laufen mit Dampf.
Die kochen nicht mit Wasser?
Problem ist, dass die fossilen Kraftwerke immer noch existieren müssen. Wenn du zu manchen Zeiten kaum erneuerbare Energie hast, dann muss die Kapazität da sein, um den Bedarf anders zu decken.
Das heißt, dass du zu den Kosten für eine kW/h erneuerbarem Strom noch die Kosten für die ganze fossile Infrastruktur addieren musst, weil die Kraftwerke immer noch gebaut und gewartet werden müssen.
CO₂-mäßig hat man auch ein Problem. Die fossile Stromerzeugung funktioniert über Dampf. Man muss also erst gewaltige Mengen Wasser zum Kochen bringen, bevor man die Turbinen anschmeißen kann. Praktisch muss man Wasser am Köcheln halten, auch wenn die Erneuerbaren auf dem Papier gut liefern. Die Reduzierung des CO₂-Ausstoßes ist also viel kleiner, als es der Anteil der Erneuerbaren vermuten ließe.
They’ll play whack a mole for decades, just like they have been for P2P file sharing.
Some differences to that, though.
Downloaders can be prosecuted. That raises the question of what happens to kids or their parents who use non-compliant sites.
Blocked servers are inaccessible to adults, too, which raises freedom of information issues. These servers don’t contain illegal information, after all.
Large scale piracy is illegal pretty much everywhere, meaning that the industry can go after the operators and get the servers offline. Not so here.
Ok. Smaller platforms like this here lemmy server don’t do anything because it’s expensive, or they are ethically opposed. They have no business in Australia and fines can’t be collected. Australian kids (and adults who want to be anonymous, or don’t like the government-mandated changes) flock to these platforms.
What now?
It’ll be more than a question. But again, how will Australia enforce that? Even if Australia provided a free API for age checks, it would still be a hassle to implement it. Are eg Fediverse devs going to do that?
Australian law enforcement can seize servers that are physically in Australia. It can also cut off cash flow for any business with paying customers in Australia. And all the rest? Even aside from free VPNs, there is a lot of internet that they can’t touch.
They can lean on the likes of Youtube or Facebook to steer people in a more government approved direction. But as soon as people become annoyed or bored, they just go elsewhere beyond government control. If ID requirements are onerous for ordinary people, they will avoid compliant sites from the start.
The government could make Australian ISPs use a blacklist or a whitelist. Serious enforcement is possible, but not without going full totalitarian.
Ok, and how will it be enforced at all?
German Amazon has it free with ads.
Not quite. You can’t turn movies into books or games, or vice versa, for example. Sometimes such projects get stuck in limbo. Or think about how everyone hated the final season of Game of Thrones. Can’t do anything about that in our life times.
At least it’s not slacking off anymore.
The “battle” is the result of copyright people trying to use open source people for their ends.
In the past, for software, the focus was completely on the terms of the license. If you look at OSI’s new definition, you will find no mention of that, despite the fact that common licenses in the AI world are not in line with traditional standards. The big focus is data, because that is what copyright people care about. AI trainers are supposed to provide extensive documentation on training data. That’s exactly the same demand that the copyright lobby managed to get into the european AI Act. They will use that to sue people for piracy.
Of course, what the copyright people really want is free money. They’re spreading the myth that training data is like source code and training like compiling. That may seem like a harmless, flawed analogy. But the implication is that the people who work and pay to do open source AI have actually done nothing except piracy. If they can convince judges or politicians who don’t understand the implications then this may cause a lot of damage.
That gives 30% to Steam though. Better use Itch.io as linked on the github page.
Other way around. The NNs are written in, mostly, Python. The frameworks, mainly Pytorch now, handle the heavy-duty math.
Musk also has his hands on a fair amount of data through X and Tesla. But yeah… Copyright expansion seems like an odd place to start breaking the constitution.
You’re right about the regulation but I’m not so sure about the copyright exemptions. All in all, you’d think he’s more likely to side with property owners - especially the heirs of media empires - over progress.
The insistence on electoral districts.
You get that across the English-speaking world, though. The really weird thing is that even people who see the problem want to keep the districts and argue for non-solutions like ranked-choice voting.
Centuries ago, it made sense. Communities chose one of their own to argue for their interests in front of the king. Which communities had the privilege? Obviously that’s up to the king to decide. Before modern communication tech, it also made sense that communities would be defined by geography.
Little of that makes sense anymore. When their candidate loses, people don’t feel like the 2nd best guy is representing them. They feel disenfranchised.
It used to be, in the US, that minorities - specifically African Americans - were denied representation. Today, census data is used to draw districts dominated by minority ethnic groups so that they can send one of their own to congress. This might not be a good thing, because candidates elsewhere do not have to appeal to these minorities or take their interests into account. Minorities that are not geographically concentrated - eg LGBTQ - cannot gain representation that way.
The process is entirely top-down and undemocratic. Of course, it is gamed.
Aside from that, the mere fact that representation is geography based influences which issues dominate. The more likely you are to move before the next election, the less your interests matter. That goes for both parties. But you can also see a pronounced urban/rural divide in party preference. Rural vs urban determines interests and opinions in very basic ways. Say, guns: High-population density makes them a dangerous threat and not much else. In the country, they are a tool for hunting.
Thank you. Since we decided a few weeks ago to adopt the leaf as legal tender, we have, of course, all become immensely rich.
But we have also run into a small inflation problem on account of the high level of leaf availability, which means that, I gather, the current going rate has something like three deciduous forests buying on ship’s peanut.
So in order to obviate this problem and effectively revalue the leaf, we are about to embark on a massive defoliation campaign, and…er, burn down all the forests. I think you’ll all agree that’s a sensible move under the circumstances.
Many were increasingly of the opinion that they’d all made a big mistake coming down from the trees in the first place, and some said that even the trees had been a bad move, and that no-one should ever have left the oceans.
Well, maybe it wouldn’t if it was gluten-free. Have you thought of that? No, you didn’t, you only think of yourself.
So they just… f*ck off and die.