Most wells at Cape Station are between 8,000 and 9,000 feet deep, and the deepest one extends a mind-blowing 15,000 feet below the surface. That is about the depth you'd get to if you stacked 50 Statues of Liberty on top of each other!
For those who prefer a less American-centric metric: 8,000–9,000 feet is approximately 2.5 kilometers. 15,000 feet is about 4.5 kilometers — roughly the height of 14 Eiffel Towers stacked on top of each other!
It was the tallest freestanding structure in France from 1889 to 2004 (when it was surpassed by one of the pillars of the Millau Viaduct; it's still the second-tallest). Must have been absolutely mind blowing at ~312m when it was new - the record was around 150m for centuries before it.
Internationally ambiguous though, the world at large equates football with FIFA and Australians picture something much larger with more foot to ellipsoid than a tiny US handegg court.
One statue of liberty (Liberty Enlightening the World, Liberty Island, NYC) is approximately 4 times the size of one statue of liberty (Liberty Enlightening the World replica, Île aux Cygnes, Paris).
I think the idea is that nobody has any sense, even a very rough one, of how tall the Statue of Liberty might be. It's not like you ever see it in person, and if you did most of it would be in perspective, which ruins your chances of determining its size.
Most people have enough trouble believing that their foot is the same length as their forearm. You never see your feet close up, either.
> 8,000–9,000 feet is approximately 2.5 kilometers.
The usual value for the geothermal gradient is 25 to 30 degrees C per kilometer. So at 2.5km, in most locations they might be able to get boiling water, but not superheated steam.
Most of the geothermal enthusiasts are talking about needing to go down 4 to 12 kilometers. Is there something special about the geology at this site?
The site is part of the largest high-quality geothermal basin in the world. It is larger than most countries, encompassing almost the entirety of Nevada and large parts of adjacent States. The geothermal potential of the region is enormous, even just using classic geothermal technology.
The US has long been the world's leading producer of geothermal power, mostly generated from this basin.
I couldn't see anything that said, but... probably.
Beaver County, Utah, has at least one hot spring, and I suspect more than that. I'm pretty sure that the location for this project was not chosen at random.
Found a geothermal potential map of the US.[1] Utah is in a different basin, but Colorado has a nice big hot spot.
It's not a fully renewable resource. It's possible to pull out too much heat too and deplete the resource.
The entire geothermal heating of the planet is only 50 terawatts, which seems big, but it's spread over 500 million square kilometers. Or 100KW/km^2, which is not much. Solar is orders of magnitude larger.
likely it is hot, porous rock that is capped in such a way that injected water will heat to the super critical point for water , or water exists as a super critical fluid there already
The title is a bit clickbaity. Its about creating your own piece of art by printing existing, publicly available, works. Anyway, has someone recommendations for printing something large-scale on fabric in Europe?
That's not true, in the message they refer you to a web page with more details: About Apple threat notifications and protecting against mercenary spyware -https://support.apple.com/en-in/102174
That's why you can enable a two-step verification PIN. You're asked to provide this PIN after installing Whatsapp on a new device. https://faq.whatsapp.com/1095301557782068
As with other OpenAI based applications, I don't feel comfortable sharing my private API key with an application I don't know. Especially when the webpage isn't telling me what this app is about. I suggest adding a small demo video or at least adding some bullets on what this app is trying to solve.
I get that fear and it's fair. SlickGPT is OS, self-hostable and just runs locally, so you can check the code and run your own instance if you don't trust that ours running on Vercel is on-par with the one in the repo. You can also put a soft and hard cap on your API quota on the OpenAI page and monitor it to verify that only you are using it.
It's a self-hostable chat interface for the OpenAI GPT API.
From their Github Readme:
SlickGPT allows you to run your own local ChatGPT instance, host it yourself or just use our instance if you like. Users bring their own OpenAI API keys. SlickGPT offers them a very fancy user interface with a rich feature set like managing a local chat history (in the localStorage), a userless "Share" function for chats, a prominent context editor, and token cost calculation and distribution.
> SlickGPT allows you to run your own local ChatGPT instance
I find it interesting that so many projects claim to be "run your own ChatGPT", when they're in fact "run your own web UI". Are people really so ignorant of how this works that they're equating these concepts, or believing that the web UI is anything more than a razor thin veneer?
I guess maybe people use ChatGPT to refer to the interface, and GPT-N to refer to the models, but that's not very accurate given the amount of tuning, it's much more accurate to say that ChatGPT is a productised GPT instance, with a web UI.
It's just a hot marketing strategy, it has a totally different reception outside of HN. There are already people making 5k+ MRR with apps that are just a chatGPT wrapper that passes user input with some additional context and prompts.
I could easily see a wave of small startups that are just a few inputs and the context needed to generate documents people currently write by hand. Like subpoenas, doctors letters to insurance companies, etc. You can stand one up with a bit of industry knowledge and a couple 100 LOC.
> I find it interesting that so many projects claim to be "run your own ChatGPT", when they're in fact "run your own web UI". Are people really so ignorant of how this works that they're equating these concepts, or believing that the web UI is anything more than a razor thin veneer?
Perhaps, but also there is a huge incentive to blur that line, obviously from the developers of these UIs, but also from the people at media outlets covering them. If they told the truth, it wouldn't be as big of a story. And I'm just waiting for the "7 year old makes their own GPT" story. For a long time now, the overwhelming majority of tech journalism has been just uncritically rephrasing press releases.
For it to be good, it should also have a specific system prompt and chat history, which is fed to the model. With langchain this isn’t too difficult to build, but it’s not just a web ui.
This one doesn’t appear to use a custom prompt, so I’m guessing it doesn’t perform as well as ChatGPT, but it does look like it passes message history.
SlickGPT passes message history including a "context" or "system" message which it clearly explains to the user at the start of every chat. This is probably the most important thing the official chat.openai.com client fails to explain or expose to users directly.
You can use the same model that ChatGPT uses through the API, and it isn't called 'ChatGPT' it's called 'GPT-4'. So at least officially ChatGPT refers to the webUI not the model.
I'm not sure that's true though. The first line of the ChatGPT blog post is:
> We’ve trained a model called ChatGPT which interacts in a conversational way
It really seems that GPT-3/3.5/4/etc are the generic models, and that ChatGPT is the fine tuning, a safety layer, and so on. This is also why ChatGPT and Bing don't provide the same or even remotely equivalent answers despite both running on GPT-4.
This is a standard way to grant API access in literally every piece of software that's provided an API access I've ever used in the last 5-10 years. I'm not sure what informs such paranoia.
It's a shame that the screencast has no sound. I was curious about what it would sound like. I could try it myself via the netlify app but I don't feel very comfortable sharing my API key somewhere...
I posted a screencast on Reddit earlier in the development process with audio demonstrating the text-to-speech feature. The UI has changed a bit since then, but you can hear what the voices sound like:
https://abcnews.go.com/US/mystery-object-hits-united-airline...
https://www.financialexpress.com/world-news/us-news/injured-...