7 ms·
Why is there such offense taken to this ask? Is it because it's coming from Sam? Is it the amount? Or what it will be used for?
by brodouevencode 3y ago
Why is there such offense taken to this ask? Is it because it's coming from Sam? Is it the amount? Or what it will be used for?
- appplication 3y agoYes to all 3. I would suggest considering what an alternative $7T investment in, for example, decarbonization. Even assuming absolutely 0 economies of scale or efficiency improvements, that is enough to completely replace the entirety of the US’s coal and natural gas consumption with existing nuclear fission reactors. It’s completely boring, but if we’re talking about investing in infrastructure at that scale, almost anything else is more consequential than Sam’s vision here. There really is some special tech god myopia to thinking you can add $7T of GPU compute to an already struggling planet and think that will end well. Sam’s take on climate change is that it’s not happening fast enough to get in his way, therefore it’s not something that even needs to be part of his calculus. It’s unhinged and unrealistic. What he is talking about simply cannot be decoupled from the climate impact it will impose.