JohnEdwa

5090 is a consumer GPU kinda like a Bugatti Veyron is a consumer car, technically true, but if your goal is to get any sort of reasonable value for your money you really shouldn’t buy either of them.

Something like a 5070 is 25% slower, but you can buy seven of them for the price of one 5090.

But the door was locked! I locked it real good! They broke in, I was robbed!

Oh, the key? I keep that well secured under the doormat. Also all the houses use the same key so they don’t get mixed up, pretty convinient eh?

Makes sense to have them connected for remote monitoring and alarms and such, when a big freezer malfunctions you don’t have much time to save the merchandize before they are all legally unsellable. It’s too late when the morning staff finds everything thawed out. But that should be purely read-only access.

Electricity burned is the same. But so is the electricity burned while gaming, your system is limited by your GPU in both instances. If you have an RTX 5090 then you can throw almost 600 watts continuous at both which could use like 14kW/day, but most people will have more modest hardware, and therefore the energy usage of running a local model wouldn’t be all that much either - I don’t think many people limit their gaming because of how much the electricity would cost.

But when you have a datacenter with hundreds of servers capable of maxing out the residential house mains of half a dozen houses each (single NVIDIA NVL72 AI server has 72 GPUs and uses 120-150kW at full load) they can throw way, way more compute at you than you ever could manage locally.

So you can control it remotely, obviously. It’s not like it’s a new thing :P

Real AI is anything that hasn’t been done yet.

Damn, Coca Cola is consuming all of our water, soon we will have nothing left to drink.

It’s a bit more complicated. Tuike tried to argue that the project wouldn’t need that assessment as it wasn’t being done as part of commercially selling trees from a natural forest as a “natural resource” as the law was worded, and they tried to ask for a “case by case” exemption that would allow them to start the clearing without having to wait for the whole lengthy assessment process to go through the systems. That exception got rejected because “Forest nature does not only mean forests in their natural state, but also forests used for forestry” (the Finnish words being “luonnonvara”, “metsäluonto” and “luonnontilainen metsä”.)

They might have been technically fine had they not sold any of the trees. But, I mean, what else can you do with 300 hectares of trees?

Finnish source from HS.fi.