I’d be interested into some data on this topic.

My undersranding is plane is one of the most polluting mode of transportation, all things being equal. It probably vary a lot depending on the specific ship/plane, route, …

Data from the UK’s Department for Energy Securityand Net Zero (2022) shows the carbon footprint is 8x higher for short/long-haul fight than for ferry. (CO2eq per passenger-km). Carbon footprint is strongly coupled with fuel consumption. It’s not quite the same, but I’d expect the ratio to be roughly the same.

Right, I know nothing except it seems to involve jet fuel. This is a general comment on vacations by plane, don’t take it personally.

If oil shortage is severe enough and long lasting, we might see passenger ships coming back for transatlantic travel. How badly do you need to cross the atlantic?

Vacations doesn’t require jet fuel.

Relatively few people in the world visit the other side of the world by plane. For our sake it should remain a rare occurrence. For most vacations, there’s plenty of places that one can reach by train and bus.

If your area has shitty train infrastructure or too few bus lanes, I’m sorry, you may want to have a close look at where your taxes are going.

That’s a hard pivot. And building more AI infrastructure is a bad idea. But they might make some short term money given the AI hype.

1.225 M EUR is the maximum fine allowed by law for one of the charges. There was a 4,57 M EUR customs fine added on top of that for violating international sanctions. The fine is shared between the company AND the former executives involved.

Source: https://www.france24.com/fr/info-en-continu/20260413-jugement-pour-lafarge-accusé-de-financement-du-terrorisme-en-syrie

If the law allowed it, the amount could have been higher. Fining the company AND former executives, as well as sending the former CEO to jail is a good way to hold people accountable.

Bruno Lafont, Lafarge’s former CEO, was arrested in the courthouse upon sentencing and immediately sent to prison.

Praise be EU solidarity

Is that Oracle’s Larry Ellison on the right?

Oracle needs a good dose of adversarial interoperability.

Starting a war likely on false pretense, without consulting NATO allies. Then blaming NATO allies for not taking part in that mess. Then claiming the oil crisis that results from his war is not his problem.

I’m on the fence on whether to put Trump in the chaotic evil or chaotic neutral category.

That’s a good way to represent LLMs. Very bad and very prolific consultants.

It shows LLMs can do significant harm without the capabilities of an AGI.

Overhyping LLMs and overinflating their capabilities makes things worse, as people are less skeptical of LLM output.

According to Clayton, the AI agent involved didn’t take any technical action itself, beyond posting inaccurate technical advice, something a human could have also done.

Producing innaccurate technical advice, with a confident tone, at scale.

If that LLM were an employee it would get a formal blame, and then demoted or fired as it continues.

Averages are affected a lot by outliers with very large values, and the effect is larger when there’s large inequalities. If measuring by income or wealth (higher is better) in a stadium with 1 billionaire and 999 homeless people, the average people is millionnaire.

This study still uses averages and flips the effect with a povery score (higher is worse). It gives more weight to the other end of a spectrum, very poor persons that need 300min to win 1$ makes the average much higher.

Using median values, or better 20-80 centiles values would be more meaningful.

This undermine trust in the health care system. Some may be more reluctant to go to the hospital.

deleted by creator

Humans will always make final decisions on what to shoot and what not to shoot and when to shoot. But advanced AI tools can turn processes that used to take hours and sometimes even days into seconds

So, paying someone to take reponsonsibility and rubber stamp whatever the chatbot output?

There’s still someone at Microsoft with common sense. That’s probably too little too late.

Fair point. Fossil fuel cannot be replaced overnight. Such a sudden disruption is doing to cause harm.

The need to decrease fossil fuel has been clear for 30+ years. It wasn’t seriously acted on, and we missed the opportunity to decrease their use in an orderly and painless way. Now we’re facing chaotic and painful changes.

I hope we’re not loosing sight of the goals, and don’t bring back coal to compensate.