Heidegger thinks about tools like so: a tool is something (a thing that has being in the Heideggerian sense, not necessarily an object) that represents an extension of human capabilities in some way. A tool is thus any kind of thing that *lets you do something you wouldn't otherwise have been able to*. The important (for us) conceptual leap here is that when a tool works well, or isn't broken, it develops what Heidegger describes as a "ready-to-hand" quality: the tool fades into the background as a kind of human-tool gestalt of a human with the additional capability afforded by a tool forms. As a simple example of this, consider eating with a fork. When the fork is well-designed and not broken, *you don't explicitly have "I am using a fork" in your conscious mind while eating dinner*.
How many times have you seen someone say “LLMs are just a tool” in a discussion about AI?
Yeah I’m just kind of a rubbernecker here, but from the last couple articles I read, it sounds like group-wise they’re not remotely profitable yet. At the same time, in the States and I guess elsewhere, the data centers have been rammed through against local taxpayer objection, meaning that at least to some degree they and the state are going to be subsidizing the DC’s. Also being harmed by their irreplaceable aquifers being tapped.
Far as I know, Nestle is a big player in pulling that shit, and is arguably a benefitee of regularity capture, which naturally means a certain degree of politicians enriching themselves, ultimately paid for by taxpayers & sustainability. My point is that similar things do seem to be happening with LLM’s and their DC’s. So probably all that moves the profitability needle somewhat.
Btw, this particular chart of the author’s helped me understand some things:
Yeah I’m just kind of a rubbernecker here, but from the last couple articles I read, it sounds like group-wise they’re not remotely profitable yet. At the same time, in the States and I guess elsewhere, the data centers have been rammed through against local taxpayer objection, meaning that at least to some degree they and the state are going to be subsidizing the DC’s. Also being harmed by their irreplaceable aquifers being tapped.
Far as I know, Nestle is a big player in pulling that shit, and is arguably a benefitee of regularity capture, which naturally means a certain degree of politicians enriching themselves, ultimately paid for by taxpayers & sustainability. My point is that similar things do seem to be happening with LLM’s and their DC’s. So probably all that moves the profitability needle somewhat.
Btw, this particular chart of the author’s helped me understand some things:
