Save The Planet
-
That's a good point. I rescind my argument that training is necessarily more expensive than sum-of-all-deployment.
I still think people overestimate the power draw of AI though, because they're not dividing it by the overall usage of AI. If people started playing high-end video games at the same rate AI is being used, the power usage might be comparable, but it wouldn't mean that an individual playing a video game is suddenly worse for the environment than it was before. However, it doesn't really matter, since ultimately the environmental impact depends only on the total amount of power (and coolant) used, and where that power comes from (could be coal, could be nuclear, could be hydro).
You're absolutely right that the environmental impact depends on the source of the energy, and less obviously, by the displaced demand that now has to seek energy from less clean sources. Ideally we should have lots of clean energy, but unfortunately we often don't, and even when AI uses clean sources, they're often just forcing preexisting load elsewhere. If we can start investing in power infrastructure projects at the national (or state/province level) then maybe it wouldn't be so bad, but it never happens at a scale that we need.
I think the argument isn't the environmental impact alone, it's the judgement about the net benefit of both the environmental impact and the product produced. I think the statement is "we spent all this power, and for what? Some cats with tits and an absolutely destroyed labour market. Not worth the cost"
Especially because it's a cost that the users of AI are forcing everyone to pay. Privatize profits, socialize losses, and all that. -
It's literally the same thing, the obvious difference is how much usage it's getting at a time per gpu, but everyone seems to assume all these data centers are running at full load at all times for some reason?
It's explicitly and literally not the same thing.
-
All of them at their disposal, we should get rid of all tools
Running a concept to its extreme just to try and dismiss it to sound smart is an entire damn logical fallacy. Why are you insisting on using fallacies that brainless morons use?
Have you never heard of a straw man fallacy? That's you. That's what you're doing.
-
You're absolutely right that the environmental impact depends on the source of the energy, and less obviously, by the displaced demand that now has to seek energy from less clean sources. Ideally we should have lots of clean energy, but unfortunately we often don't, and even when AI uses clean sources, they're often just forcing preexisting load elsewhere. If we can start investing in power infrastructure projects at the national (or state/province level) then maybe it wouldn't be so bad, but it never happens at a scale that we need.
I think the argument isn't the environmental impact alone, it's the judgement about the net benefit of both the environmental impact and the product produced. I think the statement is "we spent all this power, and for what? Some cats with tits and an absolutely destroyed labour market. Not worth the cost"
Especially because it's a cost that the users of AI are forcing everyone to pay. Privatize profits, socialize losses, and all that.I think a different way to look at what you've brought up in the second paragraph is that people are angry and talking about the power usage because the dislike AI, not the other way around. It doesn't really make sense for people to be angry about the power usage of AI if the power usage had no environmental impact.
-
How do they brute force their way to a better algorithm? Just trial and error? How do they check outcomes to determine that their new model is good?
I don't expect you to answer those musings - you've been more than patient with me.
Honestly, I'm a tree hugger, and the fact that we aren't going for nuclear simply because of smear campaigns and changes in public opinion is insanity. We already treat some mining wastes in perpetuity, or plan to have them entombed for the rest of time - how is nuclear waste any different?
It's not brute-force to a better algorithm per se. It's the same algorithm, exactly as "stupid," just with more force (more numerous and powerful GPUs) running it.
Three are benchmarks to check if the model is "good" -- for instance, how well the model does on standardized tests similar to SATs (researchers are very careful to ensure that the questions do not appear on the internet anywhere, so that the model can't just memorize the answers.)
-
I had my energy company remove their LVTC smart meter this week after they started using it to shut off our condenser unit during our 100 degree days
The fact that it exists at all is bad enough, but they were doing this at a time when our AC was already malfunctioning due to low refrigerant. On the day they first shut it off, our house reached 94 degrees.
The program that the previous owner signed up for that enabled them to do this gave them a fucking two dollar a month discount.
I use a smart thermostat to optimize my home conditioning - having a second meter fucking with my schedule ends up making us all miserable. Energy providers need to stop fucking around and just build out their infrastructure to handle worst case peak loads, and enable customers to install solar to reduce peak loading to begin with.
The other thing that kills me about this is that our provider administers our city's solar electric subsidy program themselves. When i had them come out to give us a quote, they inflated their price by more than 100% because they knew what our electricity bill was. All they did was take our average monthly bill and multiplied it by the repayment period. I could have been providing them more energy to the grid at their peak load if they hadn't tried scamming me.
FUCK private energy providers.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Smart meters with this ability are great, when done well. Without them they have the ability to turn off all of your power if they need to. If they can't keep up with demand, they have to turn things off. It's better for them to have the ability to shut off a few appliances or decrease your AC usage rather than shut people down entirely.
People always complain that they don't want to give the energy company power over their electricity, but they already do. However, without this their power is total, and only total. With it they can moderate it. It's better if everyone has a smart meter instead of only people who care about others, and greedy people only look out for themselves.
I agree though, fuck private providers.
-
Running a concept to its extreme just to try and dismiss it to sound smart is an entire damn logical fallacy. Why are you insisting on using fallacies that brainless morons use?
Have you never heard of a straw man fallacy? That's you. That's what you're doing.
So mad at a joke
-
It's explicitly and literally not the same thing.
The highest likelihood is you have literally no idea how any of this works and are just joining the crowd of AI bad because energy usage and have done zero research or hands on knowledge of how these tools actually work.
-
I think a different way to look at what you've brought up in the second paragraph is that people are angry and talking about the power usage because the dislike AI, not the other way around. It doesn't really make sense for people to be angry about the power usage of AI if the power usage had no environmental impact.
I agree, although I think that phrasing it as "dislike" does a disservice to the legitimate grievances.
To give it a more nuanced spin, it's not so much about disliking one because of the other, it's about taking everything together. The power usage is just one more grievance, exacerbating opinions on AI.I think the reason that power usage comes up a lot is because it's easy to discuss, while talking about it through the lens of economics or communal good can easily get derailed.
-
Smart meters with this ability are great, when done well. Without them they have the ability to turn off all of your power if they need to. If they can't keep up with demand, they have to turn things off. It's better for them to have the ability to shut off a few appliances or decrease your AC usage rather than shut people down entirely.
People always complain that they don't want to give the energy company power over their electricity, but they already do. However, without this their power is total, and only total. With it they can moderate it. It's better if everyone has a smart meter instead of only people who care about others, and greedy people only look out for themselves.
I agree though, fuck private providers.
I agree though, fuck private providers
If it was a public utility i'd feel very differently.
-
I agree, although I think that phrasing it as "dislike" does a disservice to the legitimate grievances.
To give it a more nuanced spin, it's not so much about disliking one because of the other, it's about taking everything together. The power usage is just one more grievance, exacerbating opinions on AI.I think the reason that power usage comes up a lot is because it's easy to discuss, while talking about it through the lens of economics or communal good can easily get derailed.
fair enough, my habit is to go for relatively neutral words such as "dislike" to encapsulate a broader spectrum of people.
-
Meanwhile I'm down town I'm my city cleaning windows in office buildings that are 75% empty but the heat or ac is blasting on completely empty floors and most of the lights are on.
The HVAC does serve a purpose, it reduces the moisture in the building, which would otherwise ruin the building
-
This post did not contain any content.
Conservation work can be confusing I guess
-
Firefox has a plugin that blocks the AI results. It works pretty well most of the time, but it occasionally has hiccups when Google updates stuff or something.
I'll have to look for this, thanks!
-
I'll have to look for this, thanks!
I have to look stuff up for medical school (usually trying to find studies and whatnot) so the gemini results are just obnoxious garbage to me.
-
So mad at a joke
Still dodging any actual point. Have fun being too stupid to actually engage with a discussion. Genuinely pitiful of you.
-
Still dodging any actual point. Have fun being too stupid to actually engage with a discussion. Genuinely pitiful of you.
Ah yes, the bastion of intelligence displayed in your comment is too staggering for my miniscule brain to comprehend.
Go argue with someone else dick
-
lol
The rapid progress of renewables is barely treading water next to increases in demand.
Global fossil fuel consumption has still increased despite lots of that new solar and wind capacity added over the last few years.The way i see the data renewables are going to have to speed up quite a bit faster to actually start replacing fossil fuels in a significant way. But problem is the fossil fuels will then just get cheap and people will find new or increased other uses for them - so the emissions will probably still happen from one source or another however many solar panels get added.
Oil, and to a lesser extent natural gas, are such a convenient source, store and means of transporting energy that no way are all humans going to leave it underground or put it back down there.
The best proven method to reduce GHG emissions seems to be widespread economic recession (demand reduction) - but the bounce back has been pretty quick after 2008 and 2020 - so it's not all that beneficial in the medium to long term. https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/annual-change-in-energy-related-co2-emissions-1900-2024
wrote last edited by [email protected]Lets cut to the chase and just reduce overall consumption and change shopping habits (think five times before you buy something). The only people who will be sorry of this in the long term will be billionaires (there will be some withdrawal syndrome for people who use shopping as an anti-depressant).
-
Lets cut to the chase and just reduce overall consumption and change shopping habits (think five times before you buy something). The only people who will be sorry of this in the long term will be billionaires (there will be some withdrawal syndrome for people who use shopping as an anti-depressant).
absofuckinglutely, take some simple pleasures out of the stuff wherever you are. Overground, underground wombling free . . .
-
This post did not contain any content.
Cut back on water! (Parks covered in grass flooded all night so people dont sleep there, golf courses watered as normal)
