AI Training Slop
-
I've given up and assume that my friends and family have already handed over my contact info, pictures, messages, DNA, etc
Sorry.
I didn't know you minded.
-
This post did not contain any content.
hmm. tools are useful for what they are designed for. maybe design a bot to design bots.
-
Just curious, do you know even as a rough estimation (maybe via the model card) how much energy was used to train the initial model and if so how do you believe it was done so in an ecologically justifiable way?
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Just curious, do you know how much energy went into powering every computer and office room for 3 years while the latest videogame/hollyowood movie/etc was being made used up?
Should we ban every single non-essential thing in the world or only the ones you don't enjoy?
And please hop-off Lemmy, do you know how much power the devs used to program this site!
-
I just saw an ad for a ātraining courseā to āqualifyā people to interact with AI as a profession.
Are you in Europe? The AI Act requires some unspecified "AI literacy" from staff working with AI. Some sort of grift, I guess.
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote on last edited by [email protected]
I remember years ago someone in my class decided to make Russian look alike pictures of everyone in the class and post them as a gag on the doors. I forget what it was called, but several of my classmates were angry that the person had taken their pictures without consent and given them to some weird Russian picture algorithm.
At this point in time, I have no doubt that all kinds of pictures and information regarding me is in the hands of people and companies I don't care for. A lot of it is my own doing and some is out of my hands.
It is hard to avoid when you don't have any control over your own information because people share your pictures and your info without consulting you. All the time and without malice. It is what it is.
-
Are you in Europe? The AI Act requires some unspecified "AI literacy" from staff working with AI. Some sort of grift, I guess.
Not at the time I saw it. It was just an internet ad.
-
I remember years ago someone in my class decided to make Russian look alike pictures of everyone in the class and post them as a gag on the doors. I forget what it was called, but several of my classmates were angry that the person had taken their pictures without consent and given them to some weird Russian picture algorithm.
At this point in time, I have no doubt that all kinds of pictures and information regarding me is in the hands of people and companies I don't care for. A lot of it is my own doing and some is out of my hands.
It is hard to avoid when you don't have any control over your own information because people share your pictures and your info without consulting you. All the time and without malice. It is what it is.
Pff it's easy
Cut contact with all friends and family, get plastic surgery, live as a hermit in the mountains -
Indeed, the argument is mostly for future usage and future models. The overall point being that assuming training costs are negligible is either naive or showing that one does not care much for the environment.
From a business perspective, if I'm Microsoft or OpenAI, and I see a trend to prioritize models that minimize training costs, or even that users are avoiding costly to train model, I will adapt to it. On the other hand if I see nobody cares for that, or that even building more data center drives the value up, I will build bigger models regardless of usage or energy cost.
The point is that training is expensive and that pointing only to inference is like the Titanic going full speed ahead toward the iceberg saying how small it is. It is not small.
If you're a company you don't care what the home user does. They didn't pay for the model and so their existence in the first place indicates a missed opportunity for market share.
No one is saying training costs are negligible. They're saying the cost has already been paid and they had no say in influencing it then or in the future. If you don't pay for it and they can't tell how often you use it they can't really be influenced by your behavior.
It's like being overly concerned with the impact of a microwave you found by the road. The maker doesn't care about your opinion of it because you don't give them money. The don't even know you exist. The only thing you can meaningfully influence is how it's used today.
-
I've given up and assume that my friends and family have already handed over my contact info, pictures, messages, DNA, etc
Honestly giving up is reasonable. We need EVERYONE to respect privacy for this whole thing to work.
You could be the most privacy focused individual and your mom's facebook page would still have your graduation picture with name of the highschool you went and your home address in the back somewhere.
-
Honestly giving up is reasonable. We need EVERYONE to respect privacy for this whole thing to work.
You could be the most privacy focused individual and your mom's facebook page would still have your graduation picture with name of the highschool you went and your home address in the back somewhere.
so what you are saying is that its already over and we lost.
-
Yes indeed, yet my point is that we keep on training models TODAY so if keep on not caring, then we do postpone the same problem, cf https://lemmy.world/post/30563785/17400518
Basically yes, use trained model today if you want but if we don't set a trend then despite the undeniable ecological impact, there will be no corrective measure.
It's not enough to just say "Oh well, it used a ton of energy. We MUST use it now."
Anyway, my overall point was that training takes a ton of energy. I'm not asking your or OP or anyone else NOT to use such models. I'm solely pointing out that doing so without understand the process that lead to such models, including but not limited to energy for training, is naive at best.
Edit: it's also important to point out alternatives that are not models, namely there are already plenty of specialized tools that are MORE efficient AND accurate today. So even if the model took a ton of energy to train, in such case it's still not rational to use it. It's a sunk cost.
How much electricity was wasted for you to post, and us to receive, your human slop
-
Yes I have.
With a model I fine tuned myself and ran locally on my own hardware.
Suck it
yea this attitude right here is why ai bros are so beloved
-
If you're a company you don't care what the home user does. They didn't pay for the model and so their existence in the first place indicates a missed opportunity for market share.
No one is saying training costs are negligible. They're saying the cost has already been paid and they had no say in influencing it then or in the future. If you don't pay for it and they can't tell how often you use it they can't really be influenced by your behavior.
It's like being overly concerned with the impact of a microwave you found by the road. The maker doesn't care about your opinion of it because you don't give them money. The don't even know you exist. The only thing you can meaningfully influence is how it's used today.
No one is saying training costs are negligible.
It's literally what the person I initially asked said though, they said they don't know and don't care.
-
Just curious, do you know how much energy went into powering every computer and office room for 3 years while the latest videogame/hollyowood movie/etc was being made used up?
Should we ban every single non-essential thing in the world or only the ones you don't enjoy?
And please hop-off Lemmy, do you know how much power the devs used to program this site!
That's been addressed few times already so I let you check the history if you are actually curious.
-
so what you are saying is that its already over and we lost.
Overwhelming so.
-
Pff it's easy
Cut contact with all friends and family, get plastic surgery, live as a hermit in the mountainsAka living the dream
-
No one is saying training costs are negligible.
It's literally what the person I initially asked said though, they said they don't know and don't care.
That's far from saying they're negligible. What they're saying is inline with my point. If you find a microwave are you going to research how green it's manufacturing was so you can ensure you only find good ones for free in the future?
Irrelevant or moot is different from negligible. One says it's small enough to not matter, and the other says it doesn't affect your actions.
I play with AI models on my own computer. I think the training costs are far from negligible and for the most part shouldn't have been bothered with. (I'm very tolerant of research models that are then made public. Even though the tech isn't scalable or as world changing as some think doesn't mean it isn't worth understanding or that it won't lead to something more viable later. Churning it over and over without open results or novelty isn't worth it though).
I also think that the training costs are irrelevant with regards to how I use it at home. They're spent before I knew it existed, and they never have or will see information or feedback from me.
My home usage had less impact than using my computer for games has. -
Pff it's easy
Cut contact with all friends and family, get plastic surgery, live as a hermit in the mountainsMy dream. Get a death certificate and become invisible. Live in mountains. Raise chicken. And live a peaceful life
-
Honestly giving up is reasonable. We need EVERYONE to respect privacy for this whole thing to work.
You could be the most privacy focused individual and your mom's facebook page would still have your graduation picture with name of the highschool you went and your home address in the back somewhere.
That's also ignoring how all of your actual personal information (full name, address, social security, phone number, email, etc) have already been leaked 16 times this year alone
-
Are you in Europe? The AI Act requires some unspecified "AI literacy" from staff working with AI. Some sort of grift, I guess.
Do you have a source for this? Not doubting you, I'm just not European so I must have missed this
