Pup Biru

enron sold plenty of gas and real things too: it’s the double handling that’s the problem; not the nature of the goods or services

openai has practically no value and that’s well known… nvidia is paying companies to buy their chips and playing bullshit shell games

the difference is openai is a pretty well known unprofitable company, and they aren’t doing quite as much of the bullshit shell games. nvidia is selling to basically everyone, taking stakes in companies, giving weird deals… it’s bloody impossible to track how much of their sales are real and how much those real sales are actually worth, or if those sales are loss leaders for some investment then those investments look a lot like openai

so nvidia not only is invested in a lot of very questionable AI bubble companies, but also their own sales figures are… unreliable

they’re making billions upon billions because they’re using their own money multiple times. it’s kinda like leveraged trading with all the risk and it’s incredible arrogant at the scale that nvidia is doing it

and both positions are wrong. nobody ever said that the ROC wasn’t imperialist in the exact same way

chinas stance towards the south china sea and taiwan is what this exaggeration for the purposes of comedy is based on

perhaps… i guess the single directional execution model would help to prevent memory leaks, and components would help keep things relatively contained… and also javascript in general avoids whole classes of c/c++ bugs… but it’s also incredibly slow. imo it’s just not something you should write core system components in

to be clear, it’s not react that’s the problem here: its execution model is an excellent way of structuring UI… but something as core as the start menu just really isn’t something you should fuck around with slow languages with

and also, that’s not to say that FOSS shouldn’t do it - they’re open, and thus something like react makes it easier for devs to write plugs and extend etc… but that’s not an engineering concern for windows: they don’t get the luxury of using extensibility as an excuse

little measurable difference? the last time they rewrote something they replaced the start menu with fucking react

the difference will be measurable and enormous

that’s absolutely true, and i’m sure that as tooling and workflow gets better these solutions will become standard. for the moment it’s all pretty haphazard, and i just don’t think it’s necessarily malicious intent or lying exactly… i think it could have easily been just miscommunication and/or legitimate mistake

afaik there were 2 issues here: there was a placeholder asset left in the game upon release, and the rules of the award were no AI assets during development either. i think the first can be easily explained by it being accidental (they replaced the texture very quickly) and the second can easily be explained by miscommunication between teams

i can see how this would happen though: marketing team simplistically asks about AI assets, dev team says no because it’s not in the final product that they’re aware of, and that miscommunication is exactly that: neither team is trying to be dishonest, it’s just that some information got lost along the way

their award should have been rescinded for sure

but also that shouldn’t tarnish the reputation of the studio going forward as long as they apologise and it was legitimately internal miscommunication rather than an attempt to deceive

yeah i don’t even think the dishonesty was necessarily dishonesty… i just think perhaps the marketing team wasn’t fully informed. i can absolutely see dev teams saying no to “AI use” not having been told that the question applied to the whole dev process, and marketing not understanding that that information was important

i have no problem with AI placeholders. i think that’s the right way to use AI… and dishonesty is a problem… miscommunication is really not a problem

but i also think that rescinding the award is the right call! but that shouldn’t tarnish the studios reputation in the future if they apologise and explain what happened

yeah they do certainly exist, but bog standard “red light cameras”… ie single purpose cameras are not that kind of problem… imo, as long as they’re deployed to combat actual issues they’re very much a beneficial tool

i think it’s important to differentiate these new kinds of cameras from the single purpose cameras so that arguments against them can be made independently

red light cameras - at least in australia - are stock standard canon DSLRs… they take images, but not video

there are some newer ones that do things like photos of people using their phones stopped at lights etc, but generally speed/red light and “single purpose” cameras will just be doing stills, and wouldn’t be too useful for anything other than a single photo when the sensor triggers it

yeah i remember that as well! considering the bandwidth netflix takes up i’m not surprised at all! i think it’s like 15% of global internet bandwidth or something crazy?

I’m guessing you dropped a zero or two on the user count

i was being pretty pessimistic because tbh i’m not entirely sure of the requirements of streaming video… i guess yeah 200-500 is pretty realistic for netflix since all their content is pre-transcoded… i kinda had in my head live transcoding here, but also i said somewhere else that netflix pre-transcodes, so yeah… just brain things :p

also added an extra zero to the wattage

absolutely right again! i had in my head the TDP eg threadripper at ~1500w - it’s 350w or lower

my numbers are coming from the fact that anyone who’s replacing all their streaming likely isn’t using a single disk… WD red drives (as in NAS drives) according to their datasheet use between 6 and 6.9w when in use (3.6-3.9w at idle)… a standard home NAS has 4-6 bays, and i’m also assuming that in a typical NAS setup they’re in some kind of RAID configuration, which likely means some level of striping so all disks are utilised at once… again, i think all of these are decent assumptions for home users using off the shelf hardware

i’m ignoring sleep here, because sleep for NAS drives leads to premature failure… this is why if you buy WD green drives for your NAS for example and you use linux, you wdparm to turn off sleep to avoid constantly parking and unparking the heads which leads to significantly reduced life (afaik many NAS products do this automatically, or otherwise manage it)

the top end of that estimate for drives (6 drives) is 41.4w, and the low end (4 drives) is 24w… granted, not everyone will have even those 4 drives, so perhaps my estimate is a little off, but i don’t think 30w for drives is an unreasonable assumption

again, here’s where data centres just do better: their utilisation is spread much more evenly… the idle power of drives is not hugely less than their full speed read/write, so it’s better to have constant access over fewer drives, which is exactly what happens with DCs because they have fewer traffic spikes (and can legitimately manage drive power off for hours at a time because their load is both predictable, and smoother due just to their scale)

also, as someone else in the thread mentioned: my numbers for severs were WAY off for a couple of reasons, but basically

Back of the envelope math says that’s around 0.075 watts per individual stream for a 150w 2U server serving 2000 clients, which looks pretty realistic to my eyes as a Sysadmin.

that also sounds realistic to me, having realised i fucked up my server numbers by an order of magnitude for BOTH power use, and users served

servers and data centres are just in a class of their own in terms of energy efficiency

here for example: https://www.supermicro.com/en/products/system/storage/4u/ssg-542b-e1cr90

this is an off the shelf server with 90 bays that has a 2600w power supply (which even then is way overkill: that’s 25w per drive)… with 22tb drives (off the top of my head because that’s what i use, as it is/was the best $/byte size) that’s almost 2pb of storage… that’s gonna cover a LOT of people with that 2600w, and imo 2600w is far beyond what they’re actually going to be pulling

that’s all irrelevant though… the rule is the rule and they got caught

people should be allowed to have awards for games which only use humans, and if a game is caught cheating they should be disqualified

if they want to compete for some awards, these aren’t the awards for them: there are others

an n150 mini pc - largely considered a very efficient package for home servers - consumes ~15w max without the gpu, and ~9w idle

a raspberry pi consumes 3-4w idle

none of that is supporting more than a couple of people streaming 4k like we’re talking about in the case of netflix

and a single hard drive isn’t even close to what we’re talking about… you’re looking at ~30w at least for the disks alone

as for internet cost, it’s likely tiny… my 24 port gigabit switch from 15 years ago sips < 6w… i can only imagine that’s pretty inefficient compared to today’s standards (and 24 port is pretty tiny for a DC, and port power consumption doesn’t scale linearly)

data centres are just straight up way more efficient per unit of processing than your home anything; it pretty much doesn’t matter how efficient your home gear is, or what the workload is unless you switch it off most of the time - which doesn’t happen in a DC

it’s kinda irrelevant to the make it to production part though: the rule is no gen ai used during development… there’s no ifs, buts, or maybes here: there definitively was, and nobody is denying that

it’s irrelevant whether you agree with the rule or not… the award is for games that didn’t use AI during development. the game should not have originally been in contention for the award

i tend to agree this is the right way to use AI assets, but this isn’t the award for them… it doesn’t matter if it was accidental, if it was removed before release, or anything else

self hosting is wildly less efficient… one of the biggest costs in data centres is electricity, and one of the biggest constraints is electrical infrastructure… you have pretty intense power budgets in data centres and DC equipment is pretty well optimised to be efficient

meanwhile a home server doesn’t likely use server hardware (server hardware is far more efficient), is probably about 5-10y or more out of date, and isn’t likely particularly dense: a single 1500w server can probably service ~20 people in a DC… meanwhile an 800w home server could probably handle ~5 people

add the fact that netflix pre-transcodes their vids in many different qualities and formats, whilst home streaming - unless streaming original quality - mostly re-transcodes which is a very energy-hungry process

heck even just the hard drives: if everyone ran their own servers and stored their content that’s thousands if not hundreds of thousands more copies of the data, and all that data is probably on spinning disks

i’d also say manufacturing the devices probably roughly doubles the carbon footprint (same with the car but we’re trying every trick in the book to figure out where the figure came from)