Probably shouldn’t be run by them i agree, but they could fund it and go into some agreement to purchase its power.

At this scale everything is bonkers. The hoover damn is 2GW.

That severely limits where you can place it, probably more than solar. Now you need all that extra water, and height differential that can be at that scale.

Its just that its a lot. Like 8.5% of the entire Texas ERCOT grid at peak during its last peak in August.

Trying to re-use 7.65GW of excess heat would be a monumental task of it’s own, but at a smaller scale, it works well. Things like a smaller datacenter heating the pool nearby etc. They should at least be trying to reuse as much as possible, pipe it to nearby things.

This thing is 7.65GW. The largest solar array in the US is 900MW and uses 4600-5000 acres. The scale to do this on solar alone is bonkers, but not impossible.

You would need to at least 4x provision it which means a 30GW solar array, and 156,000 acres, before getting into battery storage for non sunny times.

It’d be nice to use some solar absolutely, but this is better suited to nuclear.

Edit: And if you aren’t storing / over provision to store, then you still need the peak output from another source anyway and these things likely always run near peak as they are constantly in use, so the size of the non-solar source doesn’t reduce, only its output during the sunny day time hours. So you end up with 7.65GW of natural gas still, but maybe they also build a 1GW solar farm on the side.

I once talked to a bunch of different AIs describing bigoted behavior, then asked if Musk doing this exact behavior (with sources) made him a bigot and they all said yes.

Except Grok.

It tried to twist its way out of ever admitting it. It eventually did, but it was pretty wild how it would condem the behavior as bigoted in all situations but his.

My thoughts are McDonalds likes to hire young staff, so its a lot of people’s first jobs. Now that they’ve got work, oh shit I should join the union. But ya, next day likely not, but the union didn’t call a sympathy strike on day 1 either. It was many years later, lots of time to have actual representation at the store. (edit: And it looks like the food workers at McDonalds partook in the strike, so they were members by then)

And you join the union the next day anyway?

Okay I did some more digging for specifics on 0 representation, and came up with a case for 3F where it was legal. But I would be shocked if McDonalds actually had 0 representation at the time.

3F had 0 active members in the union at the location, but they still had a sympathy strike against them which was ruled legal. Only after they signed an agreement with a different union, did that sympathy strike become illegal.

Obviously the union isn’t part of the company, that would be weird and wrong.

I didn’t mean it that way. I know in North America, you aren’t a union member at the company unless the employees at the location vote to join the union. In Scandinavia, you can just join the union and it’s an employee by employee choice unrelated to the company.

So are you saying that no members of McDonalds were part of the union? The union had absolutely 0 members at McDonalds? I understand that in Scandinavia being part of a union is completely separate from the company, and any collective agreement, but you still need to be a member if I’m not mistaken.

In the case I’m seeing about another McDonalds blockade, cleaning contractors weren’t being treated well, which also resulted in a blockade. The union related to the cleaners called the blockade which brought in all sorts of other unrelated members.

You still need to have someone represented at the company, by the union calling for the initial blockade.

In the McDonalds case, the people working AT McDonalds were in a union

They cant demand an agreement if there are no members. (edit: yes they can, below)

This all started because they couldn’t get an agreement for their members.

Im not super well versed in this, but i dont think you can efficiently distrubute the LLM processing like that. Even if it was possible, it would be very very slow. But I guess speed isnt always needed.

You could likely do some sort of distrubuted system in machines that had a reasonable graphics card, or shared memory like the M series macs. Have it silently intall a 30b parameter model or higher and somehow hide how that space is being used.

Local models are getting pretty good, and one focused on hacking / bot net behavior could probably do very well at that size.

But you’d notice it being used… fans would go off, frame rates drop etc. You’d probably need to code it to only do stuff when it seems idle?

So what, did this cost millions?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwK4NmQZe64

The FAB is going to need 10GW of power when done.

The US biggest solar array is 900MW and uses between 4600 and 5000 acres.

To do that with solar, you’d need to over provision by 3-4x plus batteries to run for bad weather for days. The scale of this is bonkers.

This is what nuclear is good for.

okay, now put some sort of screen in front of the wheel that shows different things, and see if you can alter it’s running behaviour to run more or less.

Bonus points if you have it running through a landscape and it’s movement translates into the proper speed/movement in the landscape.

Looks like theres an ongoing discussion but no explicit rule yet.

(Lemmy failed to send my original reply and I lost it I think, but if another similar one eventually show up… that’s why)

I wouldn’t rule nuclear out in the not so far future if SMRs properly come online. I think those could scale up demand at the pace they could build these monstrosities in the not so distant future, like give it another 15 years and it might start being okay?

And ya, the renewable way IS possible, and Texas would be a good spot for something of this scale, but it would be a huge undertaking. I imagine we would see amazing improvements in solar/battery tech building something like that out with economies of scale and additional research from the huge amount of funding it would create. Also there’s no reason they can’t make them do some % with renewables.

This is aslo why Space based stuff maybe isn’t as far flung as the idea seems. It obviously requires new tech that doesn’t function yet.

e.g Starship needs to get down to its targeted $50-$200/kg) which is not a given.
New chips that can run hotter so the radiator size is reasonable. Cheaper solar panels as space based panels are very expensive right now.

But with that (and all the other things) you get 7.65GW of power being 7.65GW of power and minimal batteries required. Space solar is more effective as well since there’s no atmosphere, so the panels will be 30% more efficient or something like that than on land. It really does solve some problems, but it obviously creates others.

(edit: I worked it out once, and at the launch cadence of F9, they could put ~1GW of solar up a year, which would be pretty fast compared to land)

All that being said, while I don’t doubt they can launch these satellites, being profitable is an entirely other matter, but being profitable on land is also a huge unknown for something of these scales. Like, do they think there’s enough demand for these large quantities of huge datacenters? I’m not convinced this is a, if you build it, they will come situation for LLMs. True AI absolutely, but LLMs not a chance. So ALL of this IMO is betting these insane amounts of money and pollution on something they think they’ll eventually build, not something they have today.

At least with these land based ones if they take on building the SMRs or massive solar fields, we can repurpose those after. If they do it with natural gas, that’s much less ideal, sure the power might be useful, but we need to move away from it and that is the wrong direction. Space based ones will just flop with no backup benefit.

You’re correct.