no, 2023 and 2024 both passed above 1.5c .. details:

https://berkeleyearth.org/august-2025-temperature-update/

You say "no", but then you agree...

jenkins did not exist though

that is absolutely false - the capital and resources used to create these things are societal scale. An individual consumer is not paying that cost at this time.

You can make the same argument about humans. The employeer doesnt pay the full cost and time to create the worker from an embryo to a senior dev.

Unless you are advocating for executing developers when they are no longer capable of working, that’s a bit of a non sequitur.

Humans aren’t tools.

That only proves the point. If something increases the value of someone’s time by 5% and 500,000,000 people are affected by it, the cost will collapse.

These models are only going to get better and cheaper per watt.

> These models are only going to get better and cheaper per watt.

What do you base this claim on? They have only gotten exponentially more expensive for decreasing gain so far - quite the opposite of what you say.

few here recall the "mainframe versus PC" era, as it was.. Basically, there has always been an Oracle

San Francisco public schools -- it was in the national news. Details of the theory associated with it include Stanford.. endless numbers of heavily slanted retellings, few primary sources. lots of obfuscated Board votes

"In theory, theory is ninety percent of practice; in practice, theory is ten percent of practice"

there is no "we" or at least not sufficiently differentiated. Another layer is inserted into .. everything? think MSFT Teams. Your manager's manager is being empowered.. you become a truck driver who must stay on the route, on schedule or be replaced.

this was true, but then it wasn't... the research world several years ago, had a moment when the machinery could reliably solve multi-step problems.. there had to be intermediary results; and machinery could solve problems in a domain where they were not trained specifically.. this caused a lot of excitement, and several hundred billion dollars in various investments.. Since no one actually knows how all of it works, not even the builders, here we are.

"Since no one actually knows how all of it works, not even the builders, here we are."

To me this is the most bizarre part. Have we ever had a technology deployed at this scale without a true understanding of its inner workings?

My fear is that the general public perception of AI will be damaged since for most LLMs = AI.

This is a misconception, we absolutely do know how LLMs work, that's how we can write them and publish research papers.

The idea we don't is tabloid journalism, it's simply because the output is (usually) randomised - taken to mean, by those who lack the technical chops, that programmers "don't know how it works" because the output is indeterministic.

This is not withstanding we absolutely can repeat the output by using not randomisation (temperature 0).

Humanity used fire for like a bazillion years before figuring out thermodynamics

Are you sure you're talking about LLMs? These sound more like traditional ML systems like AlphaFold or AlphaProof.

yeah agree -- it seems like a mistake to use retail banking for real business amounts of money and transactions. I suspect that young adults focused on a fast-moving tech world really did not live the hard lessons of the past with business restrictions. On the one hand, it is a new world now (no one would have come up with the kind of money referenced here, with Mom and Pop business pace); on the other hand, maybe you really are trying to load a trucking worth of transactions onto the top of your used Honda Accord, so to speak.

UC Berkeley students embarrassed themselves on the world stage by attacking the free speech rights of conservative speakers... petualant, threatening and very in the media. People in Berkeley familiar with the history bent their heads in grief to see it. Free speech means that yes, conservatives may also speak in public IMHO

So what is a greater threat to free speech.

A group of students throwing a tantrum because someone they don’t like was invited to speak?

The most powerful government in the world using every tool it has to make the university whose speech they don’t like suffer? Tools including threatening to remove accreditation, refusing to disburse hundreds of millions of dollars in grants, threatening to end the student visas of the international students, etc.

Also, note that only the second of those actors is prohibited by the Constitution from infringing free speech.

UC Berkeley is a public university, so its administration is bound by the first amendment according to the incorporation doctrine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorporation_of_the_Bill_of_R...

(Though maybe the actors you're referring to are students rather than the administration. It's true that students can't violate someone's first amendment rights, although they can interfere with their exercise in a way that the administration might have a legal duty to prevent.)

> the free speech rights of conservative speakers

Free speech is the right to speak without retribution of the law. It is not the right to be heard or platformed.

1A can be that if it's a publicly owned institution being selective about who gets platformed without having clear objective criteria that are not infringing.

For example, if a city council invites a Christian preacher to deliver a sermon, then they also have to allow access to other faiths.

Based on how things are going, looks like they were very much justified.

I do not know the exact specifics of UC Berkeley and you didn't link to them.

That said, I am a financial supporter of FIRE, which often has come to the defense of free speech of conservatives. It is also opposed to the Trump administrations moves against Harvard:

https://www.thefire.org/news/findings-against-harvard-are-bl...