So if a baby elephant weighs 250 lbs (middle of the 200-300 lb range Google gave me) and a corgi is 11 inches tall (and that the extra corgi length is compensated for by the fact that we are assuming that this corgi is spherical), that’s 1.43 lb/in^3. I’ve run out of time to do conversations, but this meteor was apparent at least part neutron star.

“Racists” would be just a circle of the whole map.

Considering modern militaries throw around missiles that cost north of a $1,000,000 each, $20,000,000 for 100 successful strikes on a defended target is still operating with a discount.

Exactly. And that’s the entire point. If the human success rate is (just for example) 1 out of every 100, I only have so many pilots, so I have a capped number of successes. If I have AI pilots, even if they are only half as good as humans, I can now increase my total number of successes, since I have effectively an infinite number of pilots.

That ability to bring more at once also opens more options. Overwhelming defenses may not be possible if you can only fly 1000 drones simultaneously due to quantity of pilots. Throw 10,000 AI drones at it, and a 99% attrition rate still gets you 100 drones on target.

Sure and there is always going to be a limit of how many drones are useful?

In a word, no. Not for the foreseeable future. Entropy being what it is, only one has to get through, and I could theoretically send 1,000,000 at once. Air burst rounds may take out 99.9%, but that still leaves a lot of damage occurring.

On a 1:1 basis, maybe. You can expect to change as more flight data is pulled in. This type of very narrowly defined problem with enough training data is where AI becomes actually useful, as opposed to the online slop generators.

The other half of the AI vs human drone story is drone swarms. Even if the humans remain better pilots, there’s always going to be a limit to how many drones a single person can fly, whereas AI can just keep scaling up the quantities.

AI is bullshit, but it’s dangerous bullshit.

Dude, it’s 2026. We don’t sell shovels, we sell shovel subscriptions.

Which problems are you referring to? None of the physical issues, nor the human behaviour issues are relevant here.

Me: “Do the thing.”

OS: “no.”

Me: “Fuck you. Sudo do the thing.”

OS: “yes sir. Right away sir.”

That is the way it should be.

I’m guessing that they wouldn’t actually store that amount of data. Probably processing it on the fly and discarding a majority of it.

With modern high capacity drives, it’s possible to have that storage in a single rack. If would probably be about $500,000 worth of drives though.

ICE must be having recruitment issues.

I feel like that entire passage completely ignores the fact that last time the bulk of humanity lived a communal lifestyle, the number of humans on the planet was a few orders of magnitude smaller. It’s a fairly easy setup to maintain when settlements are small and the bulk of people’s time is spent as hunter-gatherers or subsistence farmers. As soon as you put a very large number of people into a city, the communal arrangement falls apart. And many people like living in cities. That genie is out of the bottle, and people are not going to be willing to go back to being a subsistence farmer in a commune.

How are joules less confusing for the purpose of battery life? I’ve heard of exactly zero devices ever that give their energy consumption in joules. I do however, know how to find the power draw of a given device in amps, and then I can very easily estimate how long I can run that device for if I know the battery capacity in amp-hours.

For an honest answer, it’s because the green circle is too abstract. The others are numbers everyone sees on their paycheck.