- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Inside OpenAI: Elon Musk's Wild Plan to Set Artificial Intelligence Free
Posted on 5/4/16 at 9:12 am
Posted on 5/4/16 at 9:12 am
Pretty cool story about Musk and Altman teaming up for a play in artificial intelligence. It's a few days old, so maybe y'all have already covered it. But the search function here sucks so I couldn't find anything (note to TD admins, maybe you should look into the fruits of this OpenAI project and get your damn search function fixed haha).
So anyway, apparently Musk and Altman were able to pull in a lot of top AI researchers in the world for this new open AI project, which of course caused the big corporations to answer back with exorbitant offers to get their guys to stay put. It kind of reads like something you'd see on the tv show Silicon Valley tbh. But I'll save that commentary for the Movie board and just drop this here instead. It's long, but an easy read. Enjoy
OpenAI
So anyway, apparently Musk and Altman were able to pull in a lot of top AI researchers in the world for this new open AI project, which of course caused the big corporations to answer back with exorbitant offers to get their guys to stay put. It kind of reads like something you'd see on the tv show Silicon Valley tbh. But I'll save that commentary for the Movie board and just drop this here instead. It's long, but an easy read. Enjoy
OpenAI
This post was edited on 5/4/16 at 11:48 am
2
Posted on 5/4/16 at 10:20 am to funnystuff
Musk is one crazy dude. A lot of people say they want to change the world, but he's doing it. He's worth billions but doesn't seem to care about that. He patents things and then lets anyone build and sell his ideas. He decided he wanted to build fricking spaceships and he did it. He decided to end our dependence on fossil fuels, and I think he's well on his way to doing that. He wants to go to Mars, and I think he'll do that within a decade or two. I'm not sure if true AI is even possible, but if it is, I'm sure Musk will be an integral part in making it happen. He's turning science fiction into fact. By far the most interesting person alive, if not ever, IMO.
Posted on 5/4/16 at 5:24 pm to Korkstand
Reading about Elon's activities in the world bring out two different worlds of feels for me. One side is excited about the future and the possibilities. The other feels bad knowing how little my contributions impact society and that I simply complain to much.
Posted on 5/5/16 at 12:43 am to funnystuff
Nothing could go wrong with this at all...
Posted on 5/5/16 at 6:23 am to Jim Rockford
#JudgementDay
Posted on 5/5/16 at 9:17 am to Jim Rockford
quote:Well, if true AI is possible, someone will create it eventually. We just have to hope the good guys do it first.
Nothing could go wrong with this at all...
Posted on 5/5/16 at 11:50 am to Korkstand
quote:
He decided to end our dependence on fossil fuels, and I think he's well on his way to doing that.
You mean because he started an electric car company?
Where does the electricity that powers those batteries come from again?
quote:
He wants to go to Mars, and I think he'll do that within a decade or two.
Without significant government funding, this is doubtful
This post was edited on 5/5/16 at 11:52 am
Posted on 5/5/16 at 12:29 pm to GenesChin
Do you really have absolutely zero ability to reason about things? Do you not realize that switching to electric vehicles is a necessary step toward eliminating the need for fossil fuels?
Why are you trying to take away from the man? Jealousy?
quote:Tesla is pushing battery tech development hard. They are also building out fast charging infrastructure. Are you really trying to minimize what the man has done and is doing?
You mean because he started an electric car company?
quote:Surely you know that there are numerous ways to generate electricity, right? And surely you know that even when using power generated with fossil fuels, power plants do so much more efficiently than IC engines, right? Also, are you suggesting that there is a better way to go about shifting where the world's energy comes from? If so, how? Please, show us all how much smarter you are than Elon Musk.
Where does the electricity that powers those batteries come from again?
quote:Whether this is true or not... so? Lots of things would never happen without government funding. The internet, for example. Does that take anything away from the people who dreamed and worked to make it happen? And I think that if he gets government funding, he will put a person on Mars (likely himself) within 10 years, and without government funding it may take 20 years. He is pretty good at doing typically expensive things cheaply, and I'm sure there are enough billionaires to fund the mission privately.quote:Without significant government funding, this is doubtful
He wants to go to Mars, and I think he'll do that within a decade or two.
Why are you trying to take away from the man? Jealousy?
Posted on 5/5/16 at 1:38 pm to Korkstand
quote:
And surely you know that even when using power generated with fossil fuels, power plants do so much more efficiently than IC engines, right?
I have read some things that say the exact opposite; however, you're other points I can agree with...
Posted on 5/5/16 at 2:15 pm to guedeaux
quote:Can you link any? The problem with trying to compare total fossil fuel energy efficiency for IC vs. electric vehicles is that they take two totally different paths. In both cases, it's safe to say that only a tiny fraction of the available energy ends up getting put to work driving a vehicle down the road. Also, in both cases it's easy to fudge the numbers to make one look better than the other.
I have read some things that say the exact opposite
In the case of ICE cars, oil must be extracted, transported, processed, transported again, then finally burned. That last step that actually drives the vehicle is only about 20% efficient (maybe even 16-17% after drivetrain losses to the wheels), but I don't really have a clue how much energy is used in the other steps. Do you?
In the case of electric cars, they are in the neighborhood of 60-70% efficient at using power, battery to wheels. On top of that, you have the power plant efficiency, which is in the neighborhood of 35% for coal. Multiplying, that gives electric cars something like 23% efficiency, and that's probably worst case.
Trying to figure the energy losses in getting various fuels to various plants doesn't sound like something I want to do. But even in the worst case, it looks like electric vehicles are more efficient at converting fossil fuel to power to the wheels. That's assuming 100% of the electric car's power comes from fossil fuel power plants. It only gets better as you add renewable sources. This page does some calcs.
And then some calculations throw in the energy cost of building the cars, and there are so many ways to fudge numbers there that I'm not even sure it's worth arguing over.
And then none of that really matters to the argument, which is switching to electric vehicles is a necessary step in eliminating dependence on fossil fuels. I will never understand the argument about "well where do you think that electricity comes from durrr?"
Posted on 5/5/16 at 3:13 pm to Korkstand
quote:
Can you link any?
Eventually, but I just remember reading a few different articles which showed that based on the efficiency and carbon output, ICE was lower than getting it from coal power plant then to the batteries in the car.
quote:
In the case of ICE cars, oil must be extracted, transported, processed, transported again, then finally burned.
This is definitely the deal-breaker in that argument (and a great example of how people can look at the small picture when trying to argue the big picture)
quote:
And then none of that really matters to the argument, which is switching to electric vehicles is a necessary step in eliminating dependence on fossil fuels.
What a wonderful day that will be. Even if just most commuter vehicles were electric. Farm equipment, large transportation vehicles can still be powered by gas.
And for the record, I am unconvinced about mankind inducing climate change, but I can still see the necessity of not being dependent on fossil fuels.
Posted on 5/5/16 at 4:07 pm to Korkstand
quote:
And then none of that really matters to the argument, which is switching to electric vehicles is a necessary step in eliminating dependence on fossil fuels. I will never understand the argument about "well where do you think that electricity comes from durrr?"
I think the problem is when it is described as "clean." Which is bullshite. All that electricity has to be produced and coal is a "dirtier" source than gasoline (and perhaps even clean diesel) and about even with old fashioned sooty diesel.
But, you're correct that economy of scale and all that tends to favor the electric solution - IF the batteries weren't so freaking dirty/"non-green" - as well as expensive.
I'm glad we're working on these solutions, but I'm an adult and don't pretend any of them is a panacea or solution to burning all the fossil fuels on the planet. We're going to burn all of them. Get used to it.
As a species and civilization, we ARE going to need a post-fossil fuel solution to energy - I agree with you - but we're well over a century away from that as a reality or necessity, really.
This post was edited on 5/5/16 at 4:08 pm
Posted on 5/5/16 at 5:21 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:Nothing is completely clean, but I think it's decidedly cleaner. And like I said, there are much cleaner ways to generate electricity than coal.
I think the problem is when it is described as "clean." Which is bullshite. All that electricity has to be produced and coal is a "dirtier" source than gasoline (and perhaps even clean diesel) and about even with old fashioned sooty diesel.
quote:I don't know all the details about battery production and recycling, but from what I understand, most of the dirtiness is from mining the materials (mostly copper and aluminum, I believe, which we use a lot of anyway for many purposes). Li-ion batteries are basically 100% recyclable, though, and there will come a point when recycling them is as economical as mining new material. Whether this happens via market forces or government intervention, I can't say. Or, maybe a new, cleaner tech will come along to replace Li-ion. In any case, I see it as a solvable problem, and a better problem to have than continuing to make a mess by burning everything we can find.
But, you're correct that economy of scale and all that tends to favor the electric solution - IF the batteries weren't so freaking dirty/"non-green" - as well as expensive.
quote:Probably so. But I'm also obviously glad that we're working on these solutions now rather than waiting until the end.
I'm glad we're working on these solutions, but I'm an adult and don't pretend any of them is a panacea or solution to burning all the fossil fuels on the planet. We're going to burn all of them. Get used to it.
quote:Well, it will probably take us that long to solve most of the problems, both those we know about and those that won't become apparent until after we're a ways down that road.
As a species and civilization, we ARE going to need a post-fossil fuel solution to energy - I agree with you - but we're well over a century away from that as a reality or necessity, really.
But there is always a chance of something happening to force the transition on us sooner. Maybe political issues cut off our oil sources, and prices shoot through the roof and put a major strain on the economy. Or, how likely is it that a terror attack knocks out big chunks of our power grid and generation capacity? What kind of havoc could be caused by just a handful of suicide bombers? You could easily make a case that, for national and economic security, our electricity generation should be much more distributed (solar panels on nearly every roof, wind farms wherever feasible, etc.), and we should have the capacity to supply nearly all of our own transportation fuel/energy ourselves.
Also, we might be a million years away from having to move to another planet, but I'm glad people are working on that already, too.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News