I wonder if this will incentivize pushing compute back toward the user instead of in big centralized facilities, sonething like a repeat of the PC revolution.

Or will it just incentivize harsher treatment of noncompliant parts of the population?

Or just pushing these things far from urban areas where they probably should have been already?

Probably a bit of each, and some more I'm not thinking of.

▲

no-name-here 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> the user instead of in big centralized facilities

Although that would be exponentially worse in terms of electricity and resource use, etc. - instead 1 TPU handling x,000 customers per month, now you need to build and power n,000 separate devices, where the vast majority of them are idle the vast majority of the time, and even then without all of the more efficient power, batching, etc that DCs offer.

> urban areas

The photo at the very top of the OP article shows a very low-density area. If someone was expecting to see urban-type density, it isn’t in the location shown in the photo.

	▲	selfhoster1312 an hour ago \| parent [-]
		That's working under the (imo wrong) assumption that LLMs are what we need/want. First, because pushing toward the user can happen as shared hosting in your municipality and doesn't have to be in every home. Second, because if you take slop, adtech, and surveillance out of the equation, the material impact is several orders of magnitude less than what's being built today. Or for what it's worth, several orders of magnitude less than what's already built in terms of DC capacity.

▲

peyton 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It’s going to the high frontier. Orbital/lunar. It’s too important not to harden.

	▲	Gigachad an hour ago \| parent [-]
		This is an investor scam and not a real proposal.