redwattlebird

My friends tell me it's screen share that they want and why Mumble etc. won't cut it.

But China isn't a crony capitalist country like America. The money is set up to always favour the government over there.

Things are the way they are in places like America because the government exists because of the billionaires (bribery, lobbying etc). In places like China, the billionaires exist because of the government (surveillance, prison sentences etc). This is most likely because Xi is driven by ideology, not greed.

The only way for the billionaires to take over China at the moment is to come together and start their own army to go to war. No way that's going to happen because wars are a drain on capital.

The difference between Chinese billionaires and American billionaires is that the Chinese ones are owned by the government. To set up any company in China requires part government ownership of, I think, 15%.

There is no way the billionaires are calling the shots, ever, while Xi is in power. As if he would allow what's happening in America, happen in China.

Remember what happened to the CEO of Alibaba? Jack Ma? When he became rich enough to potentially take over the country?

Yep. I really really want Waterfox on IOS but I've settled for Qwant. It's not bad.

I'm constantly looking for a way to convert the entire office. At the moment, it's 'how to replace Revit' and I found Bonsai but the 2d drawing elements are still being developed. If anyone has any suggestions on BIM software that can use IFC files, I would be most thankful.

Other than that, I'll bet our IT company will advise against using Linux because they won't know how to use it.

I liked it but wish it had better multiplayer. My friends kept dropping out of the party and there wasn't much to do as part of a small group other than to collect corvette parts to make bigger (or smaller) outrageous ships.

Could be tempted to do the massive week long runs but... I just got back into BG3.

Hi. How's your day/evening been? Learn anything new today?

They gave root permission and proceeded to get rooted in return.

Does that phrase work?

Ok. We're deviating off the point of LLM profitability here and have driven this conversation off into the weeds. So I'll make this one last comment, and then I'm done. This debate has been interesting but exhausting.

Final counterpoints:

• $3.5mil is the cost of the connection footed by the energy provider and tax payer, and provides no ROI to investors like NVIDIA, hence no profit to LLM and "AI" in general.
• As far as I can tell, the biggest method of external income for LLM companies are subscriptions and there is simply not enough uptake in subscriptions to get ROI, so they try to force consumers to use it which ends up pushing away your customer base since you're taking away their power of choice.
• For them to obtain ROI, literally the entire planet needs to use it which isn't feasible because, as a consumer, you need income to consume and the larger driver of investment into LLMs is to reduce the cost of labour.

LLMs have long since gone beyond the scope of interesting science project to something driven by pure parasitic greed.

And how, pray tell, will doing all of that return a profit?

I'm from Australia, so I can only speak to the Australian climate and industry. I can confidently say that the model shown in Vienna is not feasible in our country. We simply don't have much use for excess heat and we are highly susceptible to droughts. DCs use a lot of water to cool down and having these all over the country for private enterprise is bonkers. So, that's instantly a market that isn't profitable. Furthermore, it's not feasible to build a pipe and re-route the heat across large distances with minimal heat loss.

However, even when or if they implement this throughout all of Austria, it won't return a profit (which is what I thought your attachment was here, not the feasibility. We are talking about profitability, right?). This project cost $3.5m Euro and partially funded by tax. It's not a great example of profitability but a good example of sustainability measures.

Also, reading comprehension assistance: not feasible != Impossible.

These companies have BILLIONS in revenue and millions of customers, and you're saying very few want to pay...

Yep, I am. Just follow the money. Here's an example:

https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/29/microsoft_earnings_q1_26_openai_loss/

not saying this is an easy problem to solve, but you're making it sound no one wants it and they can never do it.

... That's all in your head, mate. I never said that nor did I imply it.

What I am implying is that the uptake is so small compared to the investment that it is unlikely to turn a profit.

If OpenAI can build a datacenter that re-uses all it's heat for example to heat a hospital nearby, that's another step towards reaching profitability.

😐

I've worked in the building industry for over 20 years. This is simply not feasible both from a material standpoint and physics standpoint.

I know it's an example, but this kind of rhetoric is exactly the kind of wishful thinking that I see in so many people who want LLMs to be a main staple of our everyday lives. Scratch the surface and it's all just fantasy.

It is unlikely to turn a profit because the returns need to be greater than the investment for there to be any profit. The trends show that very few want to pay for this service. I mean, why would you pay for something that's the equivalent of asking someone online or in person for free or very little cost by comparison?

Furthermore, it's a corporation that steals from you and doesn't want to be held accountable for anything. For example, the chat bot suicides and the fact that their business model would fall over if they actually had to pay for the data that they use to train their models.

The whole thing is extremely inefficient and makes us more dumb via atrophy. Why would anyone want to third party their thinking process? It's like thinking everyone wants mobility scooters.