If I were Amelius designing these things I'd just make it impossible to enter the wrong way. Put up a force field, perhaps add a safety buffer that stores stuff that went in the wrong way so it can be spit back out again.

I mean that if you enter a Stargate that's going the "wrong way", as in it's an incoming wormhole rather than an outgoing one, it just disintegrates you and sends you nowhere.

For example, in the SG-1 episode “A Hundred Days,” a Stargate is lying flat. A MALP probe emerges from it and immediately falls back into the receiving gate, destroying it.

Trump won the national popular vote as well. The electoral college changed nothing.

It makes a lot more sense when you learn that the rippling puddle effect isn't actually the wormhole itself. The wormhole is microscopic, the Stargate is more like a transporter pad that breaks you down and squirts you through it to reassemble on the other side. So there's actually an Ancient computer doing all the work, and it can "decide" how some of those rules work in an arbitrary manner.

Which does make me wonder why the heck the Ancients designed the Stargate to disassemble stuff that enters the puddle in a situation where it's got nowhere to send it. I guess that was all long before OSHA.

It applies to the root too. It's a good metaphor.

Doesn't it? Trying to ban sunlight in the desert means you will waste a ton of resources, fail, and look foolish in the process. Maybe you shouldn't do that.

We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!

This is the Fediverse, you don't have to hold back so much. Go ahead and tell us what you really think of the guy.

Oh, I know why. It makes his tiny little mushroom hard thinking about being responsible for shooting someone.

The people who paid for the data centers will go bankrupt, the data centers themselves will be sold for pennies on the dollar, but then the people who bought those data centers for pennies on the dollar will be able to make profit renting inference for a lower price than those original investors could have sustained themselves on. So I'm expecting there'll still be plenty of AI horsepower churning away, it'll just be doing it more cheaply and not doing it under the banners of the current incumbents.

First movers often fail in this manner, they spend a lot of money making mistakes and discoveries that later followers can make use of for cheap.

So all of a sudden hooray for AI, who cares about the water and carbon emissions and "theft" and whatnot?

It was never really about those things in the first place, I'm guessing.

Also lots of people in threads like these are assuming that "the AI bubble pops" means "everybody stops using AI and it all goes back to the way things were before ChatGPT came along." There's still an enormous demand for AI inference, that's simply not going to go away. People will still want to use AI. The bubble popping would mean a big drop in resources being spent on developing new models, that's all. It'd help the prices somewhat in the short term. But in the long term we simply need more chip foundries.