Support NeoGAF

[Zathalus]

The Artemis moonbase program is supposed to be 20 BILLION.

By way of comparison, California alone spent 24 BILLION just to "combat homelessness".

So the entire moon program is cheaper than just ONE example of government graft and theft in the US.

I think Europe can afford to fix their own water issues

20 billion? The ISS alone has cost an estimated $150 billion so far. A moon base would require far more investment than that. Probably trillions.

 

[HRK69]

I wonder what the very first GAF post sent from the moon will actually say

 

[EviLore]

I wonder what the very first GAF post sent from the moon will actually say

I'll think about it

 

[Musashipan]

Who's gonna do it first? USA or China?
I hope USA

 

[Major Insano]

I wonder what the very first GAF post sent from the moon will actually say

'Moon base CCU since launch'

 

[Grildon Tundy]

I wonder what the very first GAF post sent from the moon will actually say

The gravity here is woke.

 

[Audiophile]

The gravity here is woke.

"Is moon gravity another woke slop?"

 

[IDKFA]

Who's gonna do it first? USA or China?
I hope USA

Probably the USA.

They are both competeing to get there first. Although the moon is big enough for both, AFAIK, the US and China are targeting the exact same piece of real estate in the Lunar South Pole.

The reason the South Pole is key is because that area potentially holds a lot of water ice, which can be split into oxygen to breathe, or converted into liquid hydrogen and oxygen for rocket fuel. There is a lot of money to be made for whoever gets first dibs.

I don't know how far China are, but I'd bet it's a very close race.

Same with AGI. Both nations are racing to crack that nut first, because whoever does becomes the supreme world superpower.

The next few decades will be dominated by US and China racing to achieve technological supremacy. It's going to be a hell of a race.

 

[MMaRsu]

I see nothing appealing about traveling 238,000 miles to live in a studio apartment made of aluminum foil. In 1000 years it will still be uninteresting with

• Liquor stores
• McDonalds & Chick fil A
• Strip Clubs
• and some random nigga yelling "ayo lemme holla at you right quick" through a space helmet.

I'll be long dead before we find that all female planet which is the only thing my punk ass would risk leaving earth for.

Spoiler

sadly fake

 

[GeekyDad]

I'd prefer NASA not take up space on the moon. We're gonna need all that for data centers.

Who do you think is funding this?

 

[Bojji]

Probably the USA.

They are both competeing to get there first. Although the moon is big enough for both, AFAIK, the US and China are targeting the exact same piece of real estate in the Lunar South Pole.

The reason the South Pole is key is because that area potentially holds a lot of water ice, which can be split into oxygen to breathe, or converted into liquid hydrogen and oxygen for rocket fuel. There is a lot of money to be made for whoever gets first dibs.

I don't know how far China are, but I'd bet it's a very close race.

Same with AGI. Both nations are racing to crack that nut first, because whoever does becomes the supreme world superpower.

The next few decades will be dominated by US and China racing to achieve technological supremacy. It's going to be a hell of a race.

Nvidia and other companies are selling AGI dream to those idiots and making massive amounts of money in the process.

 

[IDKFA]

Nvidia and other companies are selling AGI dream to those idiots and making massive amounts of money in the process.

AGI isn't a dream. It's the natural progression for AI. China and the US are both investing vast resources to become the first one to crack AGI.

However, your skepticism is perhaps valid, especially with the massive gap between the financial hype and the hard reality of what AI actually delivers. The US and CCP are investing heavily because they view AI as the path to industrial dominance. Simultaneously, tech giants like Nvidia are taking advantage of a historic corporate panic and making obscene amounts of money by selling infrastructure to companies that are overspending due to FOMO. Companies rightly or wrongly believe that without AI they'll be left behind.

From a geopolitical standpoint, the US and China are not chasing a sci-fi dream of AGI, but are funding a practical technology race. The fact of the matter is, AGI is a real goal and whoever gets there first controls the future of global economic and military power, meaning neither country can afford to stop spending, regardless of the price tag.

 

[Bojji]

AGI isn't a dream. It's the natural progression for AI. China and the US are both investing vast resources to become the first one to crack AGI.

However, your skepticism is perhaps valid, especially with the massive gap between the financial hype and the hard reality of what AI actually delivers. The US and CCP are investing heavily because they view AI as the path to industrial dominance. Simultaneously, tech giants like Nvidia are taking advantage of a historic corporate panic and making obscene amounts of money by selling infrastructure to companies that are overspending due to FOMO. Companies rightly or wrongly believe that without AI they'll be left behind.

From a geopolitical standpoint, the US and China are not chasing a sci-fi dream of AGI, but are funding a practical technology race. The fact of the matter is, AGI is a real goal and whoever gets there first controls the future of global economic and military power, meaning neither country can afford to stop spending, regardless of the price tag.

I doubt AGI will ever be possible (or at least within our lifetimes). They are selling them snake oil stuff, LLMs are not even close to what AGI is supposed to be, this needs totally different approach.

 

[Draugoth]

AGI isn't a dream. It's the natural progression for AI. China and the US are both investing vast resources to become the first one to crack AGI.

However, your skepticism is perhaps valid, especially with the massive gap between the financial hype and the hard reality of what AI actually delivers. The US and CCP are investing heavily because they view AI as the path to industrial dominance. Simultaneously, tech giants like Nvidia are taking advantage of a historic corporate panic and making obscene amounts of money by selling infrastructure to companies that are overspending due to FOMO. Companies rightly or wrongly believe that without AI they'll be left behind.

From a geopolitical standpoint, the US and China are not chasing a sci-fi dream of AGI, but are funding a practical technology race. The fact of the matter is, AGI is a real goal and whoever gets there first controls the future of global economic and military power, meaning neither country can afford to stop spending, regardless of the price tag.

Actually, there's no indication that AGI is feasible, and it might not even be possible. Most researchers agree that LLMs will not lead to AGI in any way. It's just a marketing term for Skynet now that Machine Learning has been rebranded as AI and sold to masses.

Scientists are going to need something more complex than what current architectures allow if they want to achieve anything close to AGI. I would say the technology is not possible with current Von Neuman architectures, and most likely we won't live to see it.

 

[IDKFA]

I doubt AGI will ever be possible (or at least within our lifetimes). They are selling them snake oil stuff, LLMs are not even close to what AGI is supposed to be, this needs totally different approach.

Actually, there's no indication that AGI is feasible, and it might not even be possible. Most researchers agree that LLMs will not lead to AGI in any way. It's just a marketing term for Skynet now that Machine Learning has been rebranded as AI and sold to masses.

Scientists are going to need something more complex than what current architectures allow if they want to achieve anything close to AGI. I would say the technology is not possible with current Von Neuman architectures, and most likely we won't live to see it.

I love talking about AI. I have so many books on the subject, but rarely get to talk about it, so thanks for this indulgence!

I agree to an extent. Taking LLMs and simply making them bigger by throwing more data and computers at them is hitting a brick wall. The path we are on right now will likely never lead to true AGI. However, this depends as well on what we define as true AGI.

If we mean a machine with a human-like mind, consciousness, and genuine understanding, then yes, I think that is absolutely impossible. We might get to a stage where AI can mimic a human mind, but it would just be an illusion. An AI will never have consciousness or human emotions because those are a result of our unique biochemistry. This idea of AGI is, IMO, nonsense.

A more realistic definition and goal for AGI is looking at as software that can autonomously perform 80% to 90% of economically valuable white collar tasks.

With this definition the goal is shifted to functional automation by building a digital ecosystem of software agents that can autonomously run a company's data pipelines, write code, fix their own bugs, do 90% of office work etc. If this is the idea of AGI then that technology is feasible, although to get there we would need to probably move away from pure transformers (something like neuro-symbolic models)

If we can get to that form of AGI then we are talking about the automation of cognitive labor, which to put it lightly would be the most fundamental change in human history.

 

[Bojji]

I love talking about AI. I have so many books on the subject, but rarely get to talk about it, so thanks for this indulgence!

I agree to an extent. Taking LLMs and simply making them bigger by throwing more data and computers at them is hitting a brick wall. The path we are on right now will likely never lead to true AGI. However, this depends as well on what we define as true AGI.

If we mean a machine with a human-like mind, consciousness, and genuine understanding, then yes, I think that is absolutely impossible. We might get to a stage where AI can mimic a human mind, but it would just be an illusion. An AI will never have consciousness or human emotions because those are a result of our unique biochemistry. This idea of AGI is, IMO, nonsense.

A more realistic definition and goal for AGI is looking at as software that can autonomously perform 80% to 90% of economically valuable white collar tasks.

With this definition the goal is shifted to functional automation by building a digital ecosystem of software agents that can autonomously run a company's data pipelines, write code, fix their own bugs, do 90% of office work etc. If this is the idea of AGI then that technology is feasible, although to get there we would need to probably move away from pure transformers (something like neuro-symbolic models)

If we can get to that form of AGI then we are talking about the automation of cognitive labor, which to put it lightly would be the most fundamental change in human history.

True, they want to replace workers and destroy low and middle class. But this is the goal of corporations, I don't get why governments get so invested in it, AI adaption will lead to massive civil unrest and potential revolutions. Governments should be on the side of ordinary citizens in this (but of course, thanks to massive corruption - they aren't).

 

[lughnasadh123]

How fast are the Trump hotel plans being drawn up?

 

[p_xavier]

I'm probably the only one with astrobot, I mean astronaut training here.

 

[Zephyranthes]

We all know what they're gonna find up there

 

[ResilientBanana]

So. If we start taking mass away from the moon and transferring to earth, could it eventually be a problem?

 

[jason10mm]

So. If we start taking mass away from the moon and transferring to earth, could it eventually be a problem?

Moons mass is 80 times less than the earth, so it wouldn't make us all super heavy or anything. But the moon is crucial for our tides and weather, seeing at night, and dropping that much rock and dust on our surface would create massive issues.