Had hoped an article like this would shed some light on the environmental impacts of the additional compute required to build and maintain a feature backed by AI. My understanding is it takes significantly more compute + data, and therefore electricity, to build and maintain a feature baked by AI. As AI becomes increasingly accessible, particularly through offerings from cloud providers, the power consumption would increase faster than when folks were exclusively writing scripts/uploading binaries to process transactions. My hope is it's negligible. Haven't had the time to crunch numbers to figure this out as it's out of my daily lane.
Maybe I skimmed the article too fast and missed it while enjoying my coffee and bagel sandwich. Let me know if that happened.
Certified AWS Solution Architect Professional for hire. Oversaw a team with a portfolio of web applications on AWS before leaving that job to get into freelancing and online courses. Experienced with and interested in DevOps tooling and Infrastructure as code work. Have a look at my company website, https://groundedit.solutions/ , my Udemy course, https://www.udemy.com/user/grounded-it-solutions-llc/ , or my personal website, https://terrycreamer.codes to get an idea about what I do and what I'm about.
Available 20 hours/week, but more interested in fixed-fee, short-term work. Contact here with interest and to discuss pricing https://groundedit.solutions/ .
If you're not into dimming the lights, get a projector that's at least brighter than 3000 lumens. Occasionally, when watching something dark during the day, I'll need to adjust other light sources. Basically the same degree of annoyance as resolving glare issues when watching TV. I've had a projector for a year in an apartment with a floor to ceiling window (that has blinds) in the room where I watch.
Having greater than 1080p quality is the primary compromise, IMO. But that costs more whether getting a TV or projector anyways.
A little more than a month ago I left my job to pursue my side hustle full time. Very similar mentality to yours about the job; I had done the same analysis on my day, squeezing every drop of extra time I could into building the life I wanted. Same conculsion -- The job was draining my day, my career, and my mental health to a place I didn't need those going.
The best advice I received was to have evidence that you're not languishing after leaving the job. I am accomplishing this with https://www.100daysofcode.com/ . The work I'm doing is related to my side hustle, and it's keeping me focused on producing progress every day.
Oh, coming from a recently single, kid-less, 29 year old with 18 months of runway, leave the terrible job. The mental health benefits are so difficult to describe without experiencing them. Probably the best one is you'll shed the bad work habits and mentalities you may have had seeping into your life. It's tough to notice these without the time apart from the job. I was bringing my C-game the last six months of my old job; Pursuing your side hustle will force you to being your A-game. You'll have to be a better worker, which then makes you more employable if you get back into the job market.
Idk how the job market is for your region in your line of work. I know I can go back into the job market and compete for jobs that would be a 20-40k raise on my last job, so it's a soft cushion for me to land on if my side hustle goes poorly. I hope you are as fortunate. Best of luck!
Does anyone else see articles like this and think about how much money in retirement they're foregoing? By not maxing out 401k & IRA deposits each year in your 20s you're missing out on significant gains from compound interest later in life. A sabbatical like this makes sense to me when you're comfortable with the trajectory of your retirement. The other situation is where significant mental health issues that can't be sorted out by adjusting schedule & lifestyle around work are going to negatively impact your career anyways. It could be worth it to take the loss on retirement account deposits to sort things out.
The overarching theme is why isn't everyone using this tool. A few issues:
1) They might be, and it's being fooled. But...
2) ...they're likely not using it. Consider the following:
> "So why isn’t this system in widespread use? After all, much of it has been available since 2014."
With the compromised servers being purchased in 2015 it's assuming the ubiquitous implementation of the described system a year after "much of it" was available. Big companies don't move that fast to begin with (budgets, politics, entrenchment of current processes, etc.). Also, the article doesn't site anywhere this tech has been proven in the wild. Do you want to make that case to your boss that your job can be replaced (and maybe theirs) with this, probably expensive to purchase and implement, unproven tech? That's even if you've heard or thought of this system coming together in 2014 to prevent an attack that would've infiltrated your network by 2015.
The only defense they give for why it hasn't been used was they were waiting for a huge attack to help justify company's spend. That would help, but FICS would be better off taking on the initial capital costs and charging these big companies on a per server basis to use FICS's system (or spinning of a company to do so, idk how FICS could make this happen).
It's like saying a day after SpaceX's flight around the moon that if your company wants to get to the moon have your company purchase a BFR and send their own people up. Cool. Take a hike.