Im thinking that the finals is not utilizing my nvidia graphics card so if anyone has advice i would greatly appreciate
Well, if you have a suspicion, start with confirming it. Simplest test, does the card get hot? Is the fan spinning up? If you install a gpu monitor does it show a spike? Does your CPU even have integrated graphics?
No.
Special thanks to Microsoft for going out of their way to help make this possible
This is hardly a new thing for MS. One of the first emails I remember getting when I got to college back in 2003 was from campus IT begging people not to install the latest XP update because it reenabled a vulnerability to existing malware.
I expect they will not be worth it as they’re too underpowered for your specific use case. (I’m assuming your use case is hosting complex physical similations for a major university physics department and the old computer you’re considering on Amazon is a used version of this one or something similar.)
For my home server I use whatever old PC I have laying around already.
What’s happening here is single sentence from the conclusion of paper with the explanation and caveats removed is being cherry picked by another author who then uses it to pretend it means what he thinks it means and make spurious arguments. Pointing at the paper and exclaiming “Science!” isn’t a defense. The paper posits human anatomy and physiology that does not exist to reach their speed. It’s scarcely different than referencing a paper pointing out humans would swim faster if only they had flippers.
The claim that humanity with all the money, medicine, science, and effort placed into recruiting and training world class sprinters has only managed to achieve less than 70% of the potential top speed for a human and that someone could pop up in the next couple decades that could drop the world record by more than it has moved in the last century in one fell swoop is not plausible. Sprinting is too close to raw power output for this kind record movement and if your analysis says that it is then you need to go back to the drawing board.
Because you had a bullshit job to begin with?
All the charts on page 15. The ones where they extrapolate exponential improvement for a decade while only citing themselves. Their prediction is 15% annually for storage cost improvements in Li-ion batteries which they call ‘conservative’
Our analysis conservatively assumes that battery energy storage capacity costs will continue to decline over the course of the 2020s at an average annual rate of 15% (Figure 3).
Let us check if their souce updated. $139 for 2023? That isn’t a 15% decrease since 2019’s $156, let alone year over year since then, which would be under $90. In spite of last year’s drop that is still more than the 2021 price of $132. I don’t know what ‘on track’ means to you but it must be something different than it means to me.
Really gives me the warm fuzzies when someone looks at changes to physical systems over time then draws a trend line into the future indefinitely without any citations or discussion of plausibility for the part they drew on.
shouldn’t we rather invest our productivity and resources into a faster and cheaper solution?
We sure should. Do tell of this this faster, cheaper solution that is also adequate to meet all of our needs.
Women and girls should show us the goods so we don’t get so horny.
Yeah, nobody said anything even close to this. Cute trolling.
Oh FFS, I clipped the word new. Of course it uses information in the prompt. That’s trivial. No one cares about it returning the information that was given to it in the prompt. Nevertheless, mea culpa. You got me.
this is a ship of thesseus premise here
No, it really isn’t.
The pupose of that paradox is that you unambiguously are recreating/replacing the ship exactly as you already know it is. The reason the ‘ai’ in question here is even being used is that it isn’t doing that. It’s giving you back much more than it was given.
The comparison would be if Thesues’ ship had been lost and you definitely don’t have the ship anymore, but had managed to recover the sail. If you take the sail to an experienced builder (the ai) who had never seen the ship, then he might be able to build a reasonable approximation based on inferences from the sail and his wealth of knowledge, but nobody is going to be daft enough to assert it is same ship. Does the wheel even have the same number of spokes? Does it have the same number of oars? The same weight of anchor?
The only way you could even tell if his attempted fascimile was close is if you had already intimate knowledge of the ship from some other source.
…when a heavily altered photo of something that vaugely resembles it’s original photo in most aspects, is considered to be a photo”
Disagree.
There is no contradicton in believing that collectively shaming people who have had porn of them made is wrong and that making nonconsensual porn of people is wrong. Both are wrong. At no point did I say otherwise.
The difference is that a manipulated photo starts with a photo. It actually contains recorded information about the subject. Deepfakes do not contain any recorded information about the subject unless that subject is also in the training set.
Yes it is semantics, it’s the reason why we have different words for photography and drawing and they are not interchangeable.
I don’t know how common it is to argue that women and girls should be treated as though they have worth and dignity regardless of their sexual proclivities and discretion, but it should be more common than it seems to be.
As for your assertion that holding this belief somehow betrays pedophilic sympathies - I have to admit, I don’t follow. Although I will say whether the literacy failure in this argument is mine or yours I am content to leave as an exercise to our readers.
Perhaps at least a small portion of the blame for what these girls are going through should be laid upon the society which obstinately teaches that a woman’s worth as a person is so inextricably tied to her willingness and ability to maintain the privacy of her areolas and vulva that the mere appearance of having failed in the endeavour is treated as a valid reason to disregard her humanity.
My favorite implication of these kinds of posts is that windows somehow doesn’t ever have driver issues.