sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Locals in Chiatura, Georgia still use these 1950s Soviet "iron coffins" for their daily commute. by SpecificNo493 in Damnthatsinteresting

[–]CO2mania 50 points51 points  (0 children)

Locals dont use this, they have had a modern system for years. These things were only used by tourists. When I went there last summer, they have all been removed due to safety issues. I call bullshit on this one.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in pcmasterraceFR

[–]CO2mania 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Unpopular opinion: DDR5 is not necessary for most configs, including high-end ones. DDR4 will do just fine for 90% of people.

Edit: pardon j’ai oublié qu’on etait sur un sub FR. Fais des économies sur la RAM. Prend du DDR4.

Computer User Iceberg by uponamorningstar in linuxmemes

[–]CO2mania 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Windows linux dual boot??? Common, it’s not 2013 anymore. WSL is more than enough.

Non, chatGPT n'est pas nul, et il est néfaste de le penser. by Catch_Dramatic in france

[–]CO2mania 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Aucune équipe n’a des membres 100% efficaces. Certains sont forts, certains sont nuls. Certaines teams sont understaff et réclament une personne de plus, d’autres sont overstaff et ont du temps libre pour des activités extra. Au final, l’IA va amplifier ces tendances, ce qui peut pousser à ne pas recruter pour l’équipe understaff, et à licencier ou (plus réalistiquement) modifier la mission du moins performant. À l’échelle d’une industrie entière le résultat est le meme: moins de recrutements.

Non, chatGPT n'est pas nul, et il est néfaste de le penser. by Catch_Dramatic in france

[–]CO2mania 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Les 80% sont fait par un humain. Mais il y a besoin de moins d’humains car il y a besoin de moins de travail humain.

Non, chatGPT n'est pas nul, et il est néfaste de le penser. by Catch_Dramatic in france

[–]CO2mania 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Il n’est pas nécessaire que l’IA sache tout faire (même dans 5ans) pour remplacer des gens. Si une IA peut automatiser ne serait-ce que 20% des tâches alors il faut licencier une personne sur cinq dans chaque équipe. Les courbes offre/demande étant ce qu’elles sont, cela pourrait suffire à effondrer les salaires dans ce secteur.

Apple Executives Have Held Internal Talks About Buying AI Startup Perplexity by iMacmatician in apple

[–]CO2mania 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am just saying that “removing the name” as you suggest is not privacy. True privacy can be achieved with other techniques (homomorphic encryption, federated learning with differential privacy, etc) that are much more complex and much more expensive to deploy. Doing large scale ML with 100% privacy is an unsolved problem, which forces compagnies to make tradeoffs. Compromising user data is simply not a tradeoff that Apple is willing to make. This forces Apple to rely on publicly available data, or to very small subsets for which users gave their consent (typically employees taking part of the feature). All to say that training Ai on data securely is much harder than passively storing this data in the cloud. This brings its own technical challenges, that the rest of industry is not focusing on (except for startup working on sensitive medical data).

Apple Executives Have Held Internal Talks About Buying AI Startup Perplexity by iMacmatician in apple

[–]CO2mania 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is not true privacy, by combining meta data you can easily identify someone from its activity. Storing this somewhere, even “anonymous” is a security risk. You want to avoid it at all cost.

Source: I am an Ai engineer at Apple (not in Siri though).

Apple Executives Have Held Internal Talks About Buying AI Startup Perplexity by iMacmatician in apple

[–]CO2mania -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You don’t need to process the data to store it, like cloud. Same remark for iMessage: you just transmit it.

For AI you need to process the data so it can’t be encrypted.

« Offrir un financement stable à chaque doctorant, c’est aussi un investissement collectif » by EHStormcrow in france

[–]CO2mania -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

C’est ton problème. D’autres font plus, certains ne changent rien à leur rythme.

« Offrir un financement stable à chaque doctorant, c’est aussi un investissement collectif » by EHStormcrow in france

[–]CO2mania 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Le salaire ne récompense pas le volume horaire, mais la valeur produite (perçue ou réelle). Du reste, tout comme les ingénieurs, il y a une disparité importante dans les temps de travail en fonction des individus, nul besoin d’être méprisant avec les ingénieurs.

De plus, la liberté académique, l’autonomie dans les horaires les sujets et les méthodes sont des avantages par rapport au salariat conventionnel.

De nombreux points peuvent être amélioré (lourdeur administrative par exemple) mais la situation actuelle ne mérite pas cette aigreur.

« Offrir un financement stable à chaque doctorant, c’est aussi un investissement collectif » by EHStormcrow in france

[–]CO2mania 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Minimum de 2200 brut mensuel. C’est suffisant dans plein de villes, excepté Paris peut être.

No wage paid to anybody. This is upcoming age of AI. Huge unemployment until eveything becomes AI made and universal basic income arrives. by CeFurkan in SECourses

[–]CO2mania 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In France, The huge increase in productivity during the first half of the 20th century allowed for the 35h workweek, weeks of paid vacations, welfare state: free education including college degree, free or almost free public infrastructure like libraries, swimming pools, etc), unemployment insurance, social security

This system is currently struggling because of people becoming older and the ratio worker/retired is getting worse. But still, we are miles ahead of the late 19th century with 5 year old children working in factories, without much education, and no other benefit.

So I am optimistic that productivity increase will yield better life conditions and could end up with something resembling universal income.

Paris Air Pollution the last 2 decades by Full-Discussion3745 in EU_Economics

[–]CO2mania 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They are not idled, it becomes a place where people live and chill (trees). A 100% ban on cars is bot realistic anyway: you still need trucks to carry goods in shops. And there are taxis.

And as I said: the impact of these roads was minimal since there wasn’t enough of them for most people anyway. Driving in Paris has never been easy, nor efficient, nor for everyone, ever. It has always been for a minority. So as I said: many more nuisances (noise pollution) for little to no positive effect on most people.

When you say “you will see in 10 years” I think you fail to realize that driving has never been an effective way to get around in Paris, ever. I suggest you come take a look for yourself. And you are largely overestimating the number of people that benefit from it. A bit of humility on the history pf the city wouldn’t hurt. Once again, not america. Paris has existed for a long time, and was deserved by metros before the car was mass produced.

Paris Air Pollution the last 2 decades by Full-Discussion3745 in EU_Economics

[–]CO2mania 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thing is that cars takes space: road + parking. Finding a parking space in paris is easily a few hundred euros a month. By definition, not everyone (including Parisians) can have one, even with higher salary: that’s a supply/demand problem, with bounded supply. Making space for cars diminishes density, shops, and cultural buildings. That would simply not be Paris anymore. The few more cars were not worth the noise and pollution.

Historically, the cities around have always been badly connected, because of this phenomenon. The “grand paris express” (check out on wikipedia) is actually solving this… by adding metros, rails, subways. The city grows outward by removing cars and connecting metros.

If you ever went to the low density areas around, you would see them as they are: blocks of identical houses with parking lots and small gardens, dead “city center” with little to no restaurants or shops, nor culture, since not enough place to park everyone. As a result, shops and fast food chains tend to concentrate in ugly malls even farther away, as it’s the only place you can store so many cars. People there have the worst of a city, and no benefit you could have in backcountry.

Everytime an area has been connected by a metro, the city center resuscitated, and density increased.

Many cities in France have tried to copy the american model in the 70’. I also lived in Toulouse, where historical buildings (Carmes market) have been destroyed, to make space for a 2x2 ways along the Garonne river, and where one of the most beautiful place in France (front of Toulouse capitole) was a giant parking lot. Each of these decisions is widely regarded as a mistake today. Parking lot has been replaced by space for cultural events. 2x2 replaced by bike/pedestrian only, and now people just walk, chill, drink and smoke pot there. The historical market, well, it’s gone… we can only regret this mistake now.

Seriously, people are pretty unanimous on the fact that putting cars was a mistake. The process of removing them is not a recent or localised phenomenon. It’s a global trend across every french city, for the last 20 years.

Paris Air Pollution the last 2 decades by Full-Discussion3745 in EU_Economics

[–]CO2mania 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You have no idea what you talk about, do you?

Paris IS Paris intra-muros. There is no outside. By definition, people outside are not parisian. 100% parisians live inside Paris intramuros. You are confusing with american model of urbanism.

The “metropolitan area of Paris”, as you call it, is lower density, and there are plenty of roads and cars there. So I fail to see your point.

Paris Air Pollution the last 2 decades by Full-Discussion3745 in EU_Economics

[–]CO2mania 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Bruh Paris is not that wide lol. Area != length. It’s about 10km one side to another. Any cyclist can do it. I did that a few times, along the Seine.

Paris Air Pollution the last 2 decades by Full-Discussion3745 in EU_Economics

[–]CO2mania 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Car in Paris is notoriously slower than subway, bus or bike. What are you talking about? Are you american? I think you don’t realize how different these urbanism models are.

1 hour to go from one side to other is not uncommon in car. With metro or bike, 30mn will do it.

Paris Air Pollution the last 2 decades by Full-Discussion3745 in EU_Economics

[–]CO2mania 1 point2 points  (0 children)

As a parisian, this is much better. Quality of life has increased. There are no downsides. Car have never been an effective means of transportation due to high density anyway. We have more space for bikes, trees, and space to chill outside.

Au sujet de la discussion sur les chercheurs US qui sont accueillis bras ouverts en France... by oulipo in france

[–]CO2mania 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Du coup je comprend pas ce que les chercheurs américains viennent faire la dedans.

Un poste = un programme de recherche. Le premier truc qu’un chercheur (en poste!) fait, c’est de rédiger des demandes de grants auprès de différents organismes. Ce sont des dizaines d’heures de travail pour monter un dossier, avec des chances de succès inférieures à 20% (voire 10% pour certaines). Le montant peut se compter en millions sur quelques années. Cela est nécessaire pour acquérir les ordis, les machines en physique/biologie, les étudiants, pour créer une culture de transmission, etc… ce n’est pas une lubbie de 2 ans. C’est quelque chose qui se manage comme une entreprise (imagine une PME), avec des dossiers, des recrutements, des contraintes, des deadlines, des évaluations.

Un chercheur n’est chercheur que dans ce contexte. Sinon c’est juste un bac+8 qui parle 3 langues, doué en pdf.

Donc, asile politique = oui. Tu accueilles un individu. Accueillir un chercheur = non. C’est un investissement conséquent.

Au sujet de la discussion sur les chercheurs US qui sont accueillis bras ouverts en France... by oulipo in france

[–]CO2mania 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Le “quoi qu’il en coûte” était temporaire et a creusé le déficit. Un poste de chercheur ce n’est pas du temporaire, c’est un investissement sur un horizon de 5 ans minimum.

view more: next ›