A powertool that needs discretion and good judgement to be used well is being restricted to people with a track record of displaying good judgement. I see nothing wrong here.
AI enables volume, which is a problem. But it is also a useful tool. Does it increase review burden? Yes. Is it excessively wasteful energy wise? Yes. Should we avoid it? Probably no. We have to be pragmatic, and learn to use the tools responsibly.
That blog post is very light on details can be condensed to a single line/paragraph. LSM trees are more efficient for SSDs and modern databases use them.
I don't know enough to comment yet but will go read about it.
Before commenting water is cheap and plentiful please read the proposed definition.
> Water bankruptcy refers to “a state in which a human-water system has spent beyond its hydrological means for so long that it can no longer satisfy the claims upon it without inflicting unacceptable or irreversible damage to nature.”
> Water bankruptcy refers to “a state in which a human-water system has spent beyond its hydrological means for so long that it can no longer satisfy the claims upon it without inflicting unacceptable or irreversible damage to nature.”
An unenforced threat is toothless. Publicly stating we do not appreciate XYZ pr that was ai generated, low effort and in bad faith is perfectly acceptable.
Very little, until it stops being stupid in many ways. We don't need smart, we need tools to not be stupid. An unreliable tool is more dangerous and more useless than having no tool.
Very. Every voter is guaranteed a booth nearby (<2km away from registered address). Including a monk who gets his own polling booth because he lives so far from everyone and everything else. https://www.aljazeera.com/gallery/2024/5/8/an-election-booth...
AI enables volume, which is a problem. But it is also a useful tool. Does it increase review burden? Yes. Is it excessively wasteful energy wise? Yes. Should we avoid it? Probably no. We have to be pragmatic, and learn to use the tools responsibly.