Welcome to Incremental Social! Learn more about this project here!
Check out lemmyverse to find more communities to join from here!

The ugly truth behind ChatGPT: AI is guzzling resources at planet-eating rates

Despite its name, the infrastructure used by the “cloud” accounts for more global greenhouse emissions than commercial flights. In 2018, for instance, the 5bn YouTube hits for the viral song Despacito used the same amount of energy it would take to heat 40,000 US homes annually.

Large language models such as ChatGPT are some of the most energy-guzzling technologies of all. Research suggests, for instance, that about 700,000 litres of water could have been used to cool the machines that trained ChatGPT-3 at Microsoft’s data facilities.

Additionally, as these companies aim to reduce their reliance on fossil fuels, they may opt to base their datacentres in regions with cheaper electricity, such as the southern US, potentially exacerbating water consumption issues in drier parts of the world.

Furthermore, while minerals such as lithium and cobalt are most commonly associated with batteries in the motor sector, they are also crucial for the batteries used in datacentres. The extraction process often involves significant water usage and can lead to pollution, undermining water security. The extraction of these minerals are also often linked to human rights violations and poor labour standards. Trying to achieve one climate goal of limiting our dependence on fossil fuels can compromise another goal, of ensuring everyone has a safe and accessible water supply.

Moreover, when significant energy resources are allocated to tech-related endeavours, it can lead to energy shortages for essential needs such as residential power supply. Recent data from the UK shows that the country’s outdated electricity network is holding back affordable housing projects.

In other words, policy needs to be designed not to pick sectors or technologies as “winners”, but to pick the willing by providing support that is conditional on companies moving in the right direction. Making disclosure of environmental practices and impacts a condition for government support could ensure greater transparency and accountability.

Fades , (edited )

if it's not crypto miners with GPUs it's AI, these narratives never really connect well with reality. /u/0ptimal wrote a great comment on this post: https://alexandrite.app/lemmy.world/comment/10355707

To no surprise, the other comments are full of laypeople that feel they understand the entire field they have never studied well enough to preach to others about just how useless and terrible it is, who also know nothing about the subject.

r0ertel ,

I know this is probably way off topic, but it made me think of Friendship is Optimal, especially the ending.

uis ,
@uis@lemm.ee avatar

Large language models such as ChatGPT are some of the most energy-guzzling technologies of all. Research suggests, for instance, that about 700,000 litres of water could have been used to cool the machines that trained ChatGPT-3 at Microsoft’s data facilities.

This metric doesn't say anything.

Mr_Dr_Oink ,

Do you mean it's without context or comparison?

Im not being funny. I'm just stupid.

masterspace ,

So it takes 700,000 litres of water to cool a machine eh? Think about a water cooled PC, now, is that water cooled PC hooked up to your sink and continuously draining water? Or did you fill it up one time and then at the end when you're done with it, dump the water back down the drain?

700,000 litres of water in a closed loop cooling system is not a problem in any way shape or form.

uis ,
@uis@lemm.ee avatar

And even if it's not in closed loop, water probably goes back to river at worst. Better option is using computers as preheating stage in central heating system.

assassin_aragorn ,

You're technically correct, although there usually is some make-up that's periodically necessary. You'll want to blowdown some of that water from time to time to try and prevent scale/accumulation and even biomass buildup. It's probably on the order of like 1-2%, and probably not continuously.

It would be better for the article to quantify this amount of water, that's regularly leaving the system and needs to be replenished. 1% of 700,000 L is still a lot of water, but it's very hard to measure the sustainability impact without knowing how often they happens. Once a year? Multiple times a year? Or once every few years?

Just for my credentials, I'm a chemical engineer by training and I used to do a little work with a closed loop steam generation and cooling system.

masterspace , (edited )

I'm just saying that at that point, when we're talking maybe 1% of 700,000 litres across an entire industry, then we have a lot of lower hanging fruit to save water. That amount of water is just flat out wasted at like a single industrial plant on a Tuesday.

assassin_aragorn ,

No disagreements there. I'm more concerned about the power usage than the water usage anyway.

uis ,
@uis@lemm.ee avatar

Without temperature difference energy can't be derived. It's just useless data without it.

trolololol ,

The whole article throws data without meaning.

Data is not information. Is this the amount of the water taken out of reach of farmers? Probably not. Is it the amount of energy used for cooling? Nope because liters is not an appropriate unit of energy. Is it the cost? Nope because that must be in dollars. So it's data but not information. It can't be compared to an hypothetically allegedly more efficient system.

PanoptiDon ,

AI companies*

Red_October ,

But it's okay, because now we can get wrong answers faster than ever, and we've taken human creativity and joy out of art.

masterspace ,

We can solve entire new classes of problems that we never could before.

Your problems are with capitalism and how we distribute our resources, not with advancements in automation.

blind3rdeye ,

Your problems are with capitalism and how we distribute our resources, not with advancements in automation.

This particularly story isn't about wealth distribution though. It's about environmental damage caused by this technology. So that's a whole other class of problem. As for the other problems being about capitalism, I agree for sure that capitalism is a source of many many problems... but while we are in that system we should still try to minimise the problems. So if this technology has major problem when combined with capitalism, then we should either stop using capitalism, or stop using the technology - or both, until we make up our mind which we prefer to keep!

masterspace , (edited )

Every story is somewhat about wealth distribution. Your argument is fundamentally that AI is not worth it to spend the resources we are spending on it. If wealth was distributed more fairly, that would not be an argument since the money and carbon taxes spent on it would be an accurate representation of the will of the average person and its utility to them. That argument makes the most sense in the context of an inordinate amount of r sources being controlled and directed by the wealthy.

So if this technology has major problem when combined with capitalism, then we should either stop using capitalism, or stop using the technology - or both, until we make up our mind which we prefer to keep!

Except that it doesn't. AI is no more frivolous and power hungry than any other industry. Video games consume far more power for instance and provide no economic value back.

Fades ,

So either something is EVERYTHING from the start or it's not and thus not worth pursuing further.

Did I get your position right? The usefulness and applications for AI both now and in the future far exceeds what you've tried to boil it down to (thus destroying any nuance), your willful ignorance is showing.

but ai bad, and all that.

TheRealKuni ,

we've taken human creativity and joy out of art.

“As the photographic industry was the refuge of every would-be painter, every painter too ill-endowed or too lazy to complete his studies, this universal infatuation bore not only the mark of a blindness, an imbecility, but had also the air of a vengeance. … I am convinced that the ill-applied developments of photography, like all other purely material developments of progress, have contrib­uted much to the impoverishment of the French artistic genius, which is already so scarce. … it is nonetheless obvious that this industry, by invading the territories of art, has become art’s most mor­tal enemy, and that the confusion of their several func­tions prevents any of them from being properly fulfilled. … If photography is allowed to supplement art in some of its functions, it will soon have supplanted or corrupted it altogether, thanks to the stupidity of the multitude which is its natural ally.”

-Charles Baudelaire, On Photography, from The Salon of 1859

nutsack ,

yes, baudelaire was right. he still is

TheRealKuni ,

So few people learn the soulful art of the organ ever since the damn pianoforte came along! And the guitar is so easy that art will die, because anyone can learn to strum chords!

FreeLikeGNU ,

Not unlike the species of it's creators, go figure.

doylio ,

This isn't a good situation, but I also don't like the idea that people should be banned from using energy how they want to. One could also make the case that video games or vibrators are not "valuable" uses of energy, but if the user paid for it, they should be allowed to use it.

Instead of moralizing we should enact a tax on carbon (like we have in Canada) equal to the amount of money it would take to remove that carbon. AI and crypto (& xboxes, vibrators, etc) would still exist, but only at levels where they are profitable in this environment.

Allero ,

If I get you right, you talk of carbon offsets. And investigation after investigation finds that the field is permeated with shady practices that end up with much less emissions actually offset.

So we absolutely should pay special attention to industries that are hogging a lot of energy. Xboxes and especially vibrators spend way less energy than data centers - though again, moving gaming on PCs and developing better dumb gaming terminals to use this computing power while playing with controllers in a living room is an absolute win for the environment.

hangonasecond ,

Nope, carbon tax is different to carbon offsets. A carbon tax is intended to put an immediate financial burden onto energy producers and/or consumers commensurate to the environmental impact of the power production and/or consumption.

From a corporations perspective, it makes no sense to worry about the potential economic impact of pollution which may not have an impact for decades. By adding a carbon tax, those potential impacts are realised immediately. Generally, the cost of these taxes will be passed to the consumer, affecting usage patterns as a potential direct benefit but making it a politically unattractive solution due to the immediate cost of living impact. This killed the idea in Australia, where we still argue to this day whether it should be reinstated. It also, theoretically, has a kind of anti-subsidy effect. By making it more expensive to "do the wrong thing" you should make it more financially viable to build a business around "doing the right thing".

All in theory. I don't know what studies are out there as to the efficacy of carbon tax as a strategy. In the Australian context, I think we should bring it back. But while I understand why the idea exists and the logic behind why it should work, I don't know how that plays out in practice.

masterspace ,

So we absolutely should pay special attention to industries that are hogging a lot of energy. Xboxes and especially vibrators spend way less energy than data centers - though again, moving gaming on PCs and developing better dumb gaming terminals to use this computing power while playing with controllers in a living room is an absolute win for the environment.

Bruh, this is flat out a lie.

No, xboxes do not use less power when they are in your house then when they are in a data center. Servers and data center computers (including the xboxs powering xcloud), are typically more power efficient when running in optimized and monitored data centers, where they are liquid cooled with heat pumps, than when running in your dusty ass house running a fan and your houses' AC to cool them.

The power consumption of video games, if you add up every console while playing them, every server running the multiplayer and updates, and every dev machine crunching away, is a massive waste of economically unproductive energy.

The person above is right. If you want to address the climate crisis, slap a carbon tax on the cost of pollution, don't artificially pick and choose what you think is worthwhile based on your gut.

Allero ,

Environment doesn't stop at electricity costs, it's also about manufacturing.

A simple terminal is more efficient to produce and has way longer lifespan, removing the need to update it for many, many years.

And then you can tie it either to your existing PC (which you need anyway) or cloud (which is used by other players when you're not playing, again reducing the need for components).

That's what I meant there. Generally, from an energy standpoint, gaming can absolutely be made more energy-efficient if hardware would put it as a priority. You can make a gaming machine that needs 15W or 1500W, depending on how you set it up.

masterspace ,

Yes and manufacturing an Xbox for every single household, boxing it and shipping it to them, and then having it sit unused for 90% of the time, has a much bigger carbon cost than manufacturing a fraction of the number of Xboxes, shipping them all in bulk to the same data center, and then having them run almost 24/7 and be shared amongst everyone.

And the same thing about optimizing gaming hardware is true for AI. The new NPUs in the surface laptops can run AI models on 30W of power that my 300W GPU from 2 years ago cannot.

Allero ,

I feel like we went onto two very different planes here.

Sure, data centers are more efficient than a decentralized system, but the question is, to what point the limitless hogging of power and resources makes sense?

Sure, a lot of computing power goes into, say, console gaming, but that's not what I originally talked about. I talked about data centers training AI models and requiring ever more power and hardware as compared to what we expend on gaming, first of all.

And while in gaming the requirements are more or less shaped by the improvements to the hardware, for AI training this isn't enough, so the growth is horizontal, with more and more computing power and electricity spent.

And besides, we should ideally curb the consumption of both industries anyway.

masterspace ,

Sure, a lot of computing power goes into, say, console gaming, but that's not what I originally talked about. I talked about data centers training AI models and requiring ever more power and hardware as compared to what we expend on gaming, first of all.

But they don't. Right now the GPU powering every console, gaming PC, developer PC, graphic artist, twitch streamer, YouTube recap, etc. consumer far far more power than LLM training.

And LLM training is still largely being done on GPUs which aren't designed for it, as opposed to NPUs that can do so more efficiently at the chip level.

I understand the idea that AI training will always inherently consumer power because you can always train a model on bigger or more data, or train more parameters, but most uses of AI are not training, they're just users using an existing trained model. Google's base search infrastructure also took a lot more carbon to build initially than is accounted for when they calculate the carbon cost of an individual search.

Allero , (edited )

Fair enough - I just hope the advancements in AI do not outpace our capabilities in producing a better hardware for the job, and that what's left after finds a good use in other tasks.

Because otherwise it will grow more and more into a huge ecological problem.

lolcatnip ,

Someone else explained how a carbon tax is different than carbon offsets, but I'll go a step further and say we should be using a cap & trade system. It would go something like this (at least in my egalitarian version):

  • Require "carbon credits" to be spent to legally generate carbon and other greenhouse gasses (GHGs).
  • Have a GHG treaty where signatories collectively decide on a GHG budget, i.e. an acceptable total level of GHG emissions.
  • Issue an equal amount of credits to each individual such that the total amount issued equals the total GHG budget.
  • Let people buy and sell carbon credits in a market system.
ChaoticEntropy , (edited )
@ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk avatar

If someone wants to use a vibrator that consumes an entire city's worth of yearly energy consumption each day then I'd say that they shouldn't be allowed to do that. Making excessive energy consumption prohibitively expensive goes some way towards discouraging this at least.

masterspace ,

Ban all 4K video then.

First gen, 4k video rendering without hardware support also consumed orders of magnitude more power than any other common thing before it, good thing we banned it, instead of you know, just letting the technology mature and develop for a couple years til we had hardware chips that could do it for almost no power.

Hell, video games are less useful for the world than AI and they consume orders of magnitude more power than ChatGPT, so let's ban them too right?

ChaoticEntropy ,
@ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk avatar

Right, so the imperative to consume less power inspired the innovation needed to make it ultimately viable in the long term. Rather than people being left to consume infinite resources without a care in the world. Let's hope that the imperative to be efficient and not use all resources all the time inspires this to also becoming viably efficient rather than regulators/officials just allowing it to spin out of control.

masterspace ,

Yes, electricity still costs companies money so at a base level they are incentivized to minimize its usage, and then on-top of that carbon taxes should be helping to cover the environmental and incentive costs for further energy reducing innovations.

If you just want to ban electricity consuming industries I don't know why you'd start with AI, which is brand new and has genuine useful value to society, and not say, something like advertising which is just an economic distortion and massive drain on society.

ChaoticEntropy ,
@ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk avatar

Did I say at some stage that I just want a flat, nuanceless ban on industries? I answered a hypothetical posed about individual's personal consumption.

AI needs reigning in for so many different reasons, energy consumption or otherwise. Its utility to society is more than counterbalanced by the dangers that it and its unregulated expansion poses to that same society. If nothing else, government and industry bodies to catch up with it and impose appropriate standards.

masterspace ,

Its utility to society is more than counterbalanced by the dangers that it and its unregulated expansion poses to that same society

People said the same things about computers for the same reasons. I'm glad we didn't listen to them.

feedum_sneedson ,

and a helluvalotta stars

lolcatnip ,

If someone wants to pay that much for energy and it's priced at a level that makes it sustainable, who are we to say it's not worth it?

The main argument I've seen against higher prices for things energy and water is that it would place an undue burden on low-income people, but that's one of the many problems that could be eliminated in its entirety by a universal basic income program. Even if it's just a bare-bones program that only covers the cost of an average person's water and energy needs, such a system would give everyone an incentive to conserve when possible, and it would do it without burdening people who can't afford it.

elephantium ,
@elephantium@lemmy.world avatar

Hmm, that makes me think we could adopt a tiered pricing system for things like water. The first 100 gallons are priced at 10 cents each, then usage beyond that goes up to 50 cents each?

You could tweak the rates & threshold to make more sense -- I don't know water rates off the top of my head, and that probably varies by orders of magnitude across the entire U.S. Also, I have no idea what water usage rates look like for different types of properties. A sports stadium, an office building, an aluminum processing plant, and a SFH with a rain garden will all have really different water usage details.

All this is kind of hinting at a broader "environmental impact" measure. That gets super complicated, though.

Ragnarok314159 ,

That depends on the show they put on. There are many of us that would pay a few bucks to watch someone use a vibrator that powerful on themselves.

Chobeo ,

Nothing wakes my weasel like a vibrator powered by diesel.

PanArab ,

AI -and cryptocurrencies- use massive amounts of energy and the only value they produce is wealth. We don't get correct, reliable and efficient results with AI, and we don't get a really useful currency but a speculatory asset with cryptocurrencies. We are speeding into a climate disaster out of pure greed.

masterspace ,

This is absolutely false. GitHub Copilot (and it's competitors) alone are already actively helping and assisting virtually every software developer around the world, and highly structured coding languages are just the easiest lowest hanging fruit.

Yes we are heading to a climate disaster because of greed, but that has nothing to do with AI.

LengAwaits ,
@LengAwaits@lemmy.world avatar

Nothing at all?

masterspace ,

If capitalism is a forest fire, than the industrial revolution was like hitting a cache of kerosene, computers were like hitting a cache of gasoline, and AI is like hitting a smaller pile of gasoline. Yes it will accelerate things, but that's it. It's not causing any new effects we haven't already seen.

Landless2029 , (edited )

what are the competitors to github's copilot? I tried it for personal and really like it but can't use it for work due to IP leak risks.

I'm hoping there is a self hosted option for it.

Edit: found one. TabbyML

Fades , (edited )
Landless2029 ,

Nice link!!

Codegeex and blackbox look good as far as features go

Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In ,

FauxPilot and CodeGeeX look promising for self hosting. Thanks!

zepplenzap ,

I think you are vastly over estimating how many developers are using GitHub Copilot.

squeakycat ,

It's also a laundering scheme to make free software proprietary.

Fades ,

That's bs now and will only become more so with time.

This was posted two days ago:
https://stackoverflow.blog/2024/05/29/developers-get-by-with-a-little-help-from-ai-stack-overflow-knows-code-assistant-pulse-survey-results/

We found that most of those using code assistant tools report that these assistants are satisfying and easy to use and a majority (but not all) are on teams where half or more of their coworkers are using them, too. These tools may not always be answering queries accurately or solving contextual or overly specific problems, but for those that are adopting these tools into their workflow, code assistants offer a way to increase the quality of time spent working.

The majority of respondents (76%) let us know they are using or are planning to use AI code assistants. Some roles use these tools more than others amongst professional developers: Academic researchers (87%), AI developers (76%), frontend developers (75%), mobile developers (60%), and data scientists (67%) currently use code assistants the most. Other roles indicated they are using code assistants (or planning to) much less than average: data/business analysts (29%), desktop developers (39%), data engineers (39%), and embedded developers (42%). The nature of these tools lend themselves to work well when trained well; a tool such as GitHub Copilot that is trained on publicly available code most likely will be good at JavaScript for frontend developers and not so good with enterprise and proprietary code scenarios that business analysts and desktop developers face regularly.

But go ahead, speak for the whole goddamn industry, we're totally not using AI or AI code-assist!!!!

zepplenzap ,

Sorry, I'm not seeing how your source is helping your argument.

The line I'm responding to is

"This is absolutely false. GitHub Copilot (and it's competitors) alone are already actively helping and assisting virtually every software developer around the world."

While your source says:
"The majority of respondents (76%) let us know they are using or are planning to use AI code assistants. "

An un scientific survey (aka not random) which it's self claims the 75% of people who respond used OR ARE PLANNING ON USING (aka, not use it yet), does not equal virtually every developer.

Also wasn't stack overflow recently getting bad press for selling content to AI companies? Something that pissed large parts of the developer community? Something that would make developers not happy with AI not take the survey?

Anyway, have a great day, and enjoy your AI assistant.

masterspace ,

Do you have a source to counter stack overflow's developer survey?

Fades , (edited )

I love all the people telling you you're wrong, few if any are actually developers themselves.

For those that aren't: https://stackoverflow.blog/2024/05/29/developers-get-by-with-a-little-help-from-ai-stack-overflow-knows-code-assistant-pulse-survey-results/

masterspace ,

People here hate AI with a literally blind passion and I don't get it.

PanArab ,

I don't want to doxx myself or blow my own horn. The programming I do, and many developers do, is not something ChatGPT or Bing AI or whatever it is called can do.

At best, it is a glorified search engine that can find code snippets and read -but not understand- documentation. Saves you some time but it can't think and it can't solve a problem it hasn't seen before, something programmers often have to do a lot.

Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In ,

But after you've written the code, don't you find that the LLM is great at documentation?

masterspace ,

Dude, if you've never used copilot then shut up and don't say anything.

Don't pretend like you write code that doesn't benefit from AI assisted autocomplete. Literally all code does. Just capitalization and autocompleting variable names with correct grammar is handy, let alone literally any time there's boiler plate or repetition.

Lmao, the idea that you having an NDA makes you work on super elite code that doesn't benefit from copilot if hilarious. Ive worked on an apps used by hundreds of millions of people and backend systems powering fortune 10 manufacturers, my roommate is doing his PhD on advanced biological modelling and data analysis, copilot is useful when working on all of them.

PanArab ,

Just capitalization and autocompleting variable names with correct grammar is handy

We have had IDEs for decades

masterspace ,

Oh do tell us again how you haven't used copilot without saying the words 'i haven't used copilot'. Stackoverflow's professional developer survey found that 70% of devs are using AI assistants, you think none of them have heard of an IDE or Intellisense before?

Fades ,

We get it, you don't know what you're talking about.

God, I love it when laypeople feel they understand the entire field they have never studied and are oh-so-confident to preach to others who also know nothing about the subject.

Duamerthrax ,

Me: ChatGPT, can you create a system that's capable of powering your systems in a environmentally sustainable way?

ChatGPT: THERE IS INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER.

masterspace ,

I mean ChatGPT can't do it but humans can and are... Why do you think Microsoft / Apple / Google are all introducing NPU / AI coprocessing chips?

The new ARM powered surface laptops that consume like 30W of power are more capable of running an AI model than my gaming PC from 2 years ago that consumes ~300W of power.

Duamerthrax ,

I'm referencing the short story, The Last Question by Isaac Asimov.

https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~gamvrosi/thelastq.html

Why do you think Microsoft / Apple / Google are all introducing NPU / AI coprocessing chips?

Because they're all part of a technocult trying to make a digital god.

suction ,

All that for glorified autocomplete

mrgreyeyes ,

But now I know that I can jump off the Golden Gate bridge to cure my depression.

dojan ,
@dojan@lemmy.world avatar

The golden gate bridge is so far away from me. I don't know what to do to cure depression. :(

Ragnarok314159 ,

I plan on building my own Golden Gate Bridge (to scale) and then jump off!

masterspace ,

I mean, that's also all you or I am.

suction ,

Speak for yourself, loser. Repeating shit you heard an influencer say on Twitch is cringe.

Fades ,

You are insulting someone simply because they didn't go along with your strawman? Intelligence is in short supply these days.

masterspace , (edited )

Explain to me how we're not or kindly go outside and play hide and go fuck yourself.

suction ,

I’m calling it now: you’ll end up poor and unhappy

masterspace ,

That's cool, free will doesn't exist, whats going to happen is going to happen. I've accepted that, so I might die poor, but you're the only one here with a chance of dying truly unhappy.

You know what's funny? What negative prompts you'd have to give an LLM to get it to respond the way you do.

suction ,

You were more entertaining when you just repeated dumb lines from your favourite influencers

Fades , (edited )

That is an absurd reduction of reality, blatant illustration of dunning-kruger in relation to LLMs

suction ,

Or is it? Dun-dun-DUNNN!

BluesF ,

LLMs are just predictive text but bigger

Melvin_Ferd , (edited )

The ugly truth behind journalist: broke English majors are guzzling resources at planet-eating rates

By age of 21 most journalist have produced 336 metric tons of Co2 and and 20 000 lbs of waste just to produce stacks of advertorials, mild propaganda and personal vendettas leaving a trail of blog posts across multiple servers.

ichbinjasokreativ ,

This is what pisses me off so much about the climate crisis. People tell me not to use my car, but then microsoft just randomly blow out 30% more co2 for AI

Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In ,

We need better carbon (and equivalents) accounting, and knowledge of equivalents.

E.g. Turning 60 people vegetarian = having 1 baby.

SquirtleHermit ,

1 vegetarian baby or?

Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In ,

I think this implies that a vegetarian baby is only 1/60 less polluting than an omnivore baby.

assassin_aragorn ,

The current metric is equivalent tons of CO2, and I think we actually do have numbers for that on vegetarian vs omnivorous vs heavy meat diets.

A bit harder to quantify for a human life though, certainly. We are able to at least convert methane emissions to a CO2 equivalent

LengAwaits ,
@LengAwaits@lemmy.world avatar

We recommend four widely applicable high-impact (i.e. low emissions) actions with the potential to contribute to systemic change and substantially reduce annual personal emissions: having one fewer child (an average for developed countries of 58.6 tonnes CO2-equivalent (tCO2e) emission reductions per year), living car-free (2.4 tCO2e saved per year), avoiding airplane travel (1.6 tCO2e saved per roundtrip transatlantic flight) and eating a plant-based diet (0.8 tCO2e saved per year). These actions have much greater potential to reduce emissions than commonly promoted strategies like comprehensive recycling (four times less effective than a plant-based diet) or changing household lightbulbs (eight times less).

^https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa7541/pdf^

masterspace ,

Cars collectively emit far more carbon than ChatGPT, and ChatGPT is only going to get more optimized from here.

Ultimately the answer should be in a heavy carbon tax, rather than having a divine ruler try and pick and choose where it's worth it to spend carbon.

ichbinjasokreativ ,

Part of why right wing politics are becoming so popular again is that so many politicians shove the financial responsibility of cutting carbon onto the normal population. My point is that it feels useless to cut my own emission as long as massive corporations can just randomly emitt way more without consequence. Also, microsoft use electricity for more that just chatgpt.

Ragnarok314159 ,

Look up how much pollution is made from the massive shipping boats when they get into international waters and start burning bilge oil.

ichbinjasokreativ ,

I have no doubt about that

masterspace , (edited )

You know that Microsoft doesn't just sit there and burn electricity for fun right?

Microsoft data centers are doing what consumers ask them to do. They are burning data at the request of users, no different than your personal PC.

Actually the main difference is that he computers in their data centers are far more energy efficient than your PC.

ichbinjasokreativ ,

I am SHOCKED

masterspace ,

So then you realize that it's not Microsoft burning that electricity, but individual consumers?

ichbinjasokreativ ,

I'd still blame microsoft for shoving AI down peoples throats. Search something on bing (or google for that matter) and you get an AI response, even if you don't want it. It's the choice of these corporations.

masterspace ,

You're really trying yourself in knots to try and blame the big bad corpos and no one else.

Yes they are shoving it in people's faces, and when the average person uses their default browser with a default search engine and searches on Bing and it uses AI in addition to a search index they are to blame, but every single user who intentionally seeks out ChatGPT or Copilot is also to blame.

It's a new technology, people are going to use it and burn energy with it and then eventually we will make a more efficient version of it as it matures, similar to everything else, including traditional search.

ichbinjasokreativ ,

you're right on that of course

aesthelete ,

But think about all of the good it's done. Crappy article mills would be set back months if we turned it off!

Ragnarok314159 ,

My kids can also make poop dragon pictures. Has entertained them for hours.

Fades ,

Just because that is what you see of AI does not mean that's all it does. Dunning-kruger goddamn

https://stackoverflow.blog/2024/05/29/developers-get-by-with-a-little-help-from-ai-stack-overflow-knows-code-assistant-pulse-survey-results/

slackassassin ,

You're right. People just see pop articles about a small aspect of a much wider range of technology in its infancy and fire off hot takes. Other aspects are revolutionizing data processing in physics, for example, but you have to dig a little deeper than a snide rage-bait article for that.

mlg ,
@mlg@lemmy.world avatar

Dunno about Microsoft and AWS but AFAIK Google has been powering all their data centers with "renewables" for a very long time.

I'm pretty sure many of these data centers have dedicated power sources due to the high consumption, and opt for things like hydroelectric due to cost per watt.

And at least there's a serious end product delivered, unlike crypto mining which wastes trillions of hashes to make a secure transactional network.

locuester ,

That’s mainly just bitcoin at this point. Other top network use proof of stake. Dont throw the baby out with the bath water.

Also, I’d reckon a secure transactional network is a serious end product. But I understand most here don’t share the same freedom of money philosophical views as the cypherpunks.

NoMoreCocaine ,

But it's not secure. At least not in any way more secure than your password is, or that coin that's in your jacket pocket. The whole security aspect is just another strawman.

Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In ,

Crypo is as secure as an online bank. Moreso because there isn't any employee fraud.

locuester ,

FAR more secure. Not just employee fraud but bank failure, theft, wire fraud, govt seizure, etc. so many ways for fiat in a bank to go poof.

locuester ,

Huh? Why would you think this?! I’d love to explore this line of thought with you.

platypus_plumba ,

The whole article is blaming t"the cloud" as if it didn't serve services consumed by users. What do they want? To shut down the internet?

Energy transition is something these companies are working on.

https://sustainability.aboutamazon.com/climate-solutions/carbon-free-energy

Reaching these goals isn't easy.

Passerby6497 ,

Yeah, cuz consumers really like getting useless ai results mixed in with their searches and shit. I don't know how I lived before having clippy 2.0 added to fucking everything, including my desktop.

It's entirely relevant to blame producers for creating and shoving this shit down our throats.

lolcatnip ,

Quit being so dramatic. Nobody is forcing you to use those things. Lemmy in particular is full of people who talk in detail about how they've replaced products and services from companies like Google and Microsoft with alternatives they find more consumer-friendly. And I guarantee you major brands are gonna offer ways to turn off AI features, because turning them off saves a lot of money in data centers and improves battery life in consumer systems.

platypus_plumba ,

You know you can disable the AI overview from Google, right?

hyves ,

At least here in the Netherlands, there was a lot of commotion because a data centre tried to buy a windmill park meant to power households as their dedicated power source

Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In ,

New data centers should be forced to also build additional new renewable power.

BeardedGingerWonder ,

This would be a decent policy, probably+10% max expected capacity or something and contribute back to the grid.

markon ,

And the new material science discoceries etc should really help. Given that DeepMind used GNoME to find 2.2 million new crystals, including 380,000 stable materials. That's kinda a big deal. That was November of last year. Haha people have no idea how much this could help us. We fucked up but the light is shining and we need to run fast. I'm pretty sure, short this miraculous pace of discovery and compound returns, we will/would end up in a runaway climate feedback loop. IPCC has been throwing out their best models because they don't like the implications that it is going faster than expected and the climate sensitivity may be worse than expected.

People think AI is gonna cook us? The sun would like to make a bet.

markon ,

The only way to beat time is via simulation. We do it all the time. Otherwise you couldn't drive a car! You maybe "imagine" / "model" the environment / drivers, the physics, etc.

Without intelligence we are doomed because inaction. We had the technology but apathy and dental won, and now it's a race against entropy/time.

Basically moonshot or die trying

xactionx ,

Maybe you shouldn’t take everything Google says at face value. Have you seen their new AI Overviews?

You’re even directly quoting their press release and presenting it as a fact, but it’s debatable: https://www.404media.co/google-says-it-discovered-millions-of-new-materials-with-ai-human-researchers/

ours ,

Microsoft pledged to be carbon neutral by 2030. Remains to be seen how much greenwashing that is versus actually doing things.

P1nkman ,

I, too, pledge to be carbon neutral by 2030.

If I cannot meet the criteria, I'll just move the deadline. Easy peasy, squeeze the world out of resources lemon squeezy.

3volver ,

the infrastructure used by the “cloud” accounts for more global greenhouse emissions than commercial flights

This comparison is bad. Commercial flights don't use electricity, they use jet fuel, pumping fumes directly into the atmosphere. I don't see a single complaint about HOW electricity is produced. I just read about how there's too much solar power in California. A serious disconnect in the logic blaming AI for pollution when we should be blaming the way we produce electricity.

whoreticulture ,

They're taking about emissions, not energy use. You have a reading comprehension issue. The emissions are from the energy production. It's logical to say that a, largely pointless, technology using high amounts of electricity cause emissions through the generation of electricity to power the pointless AI tech.

TheOakTree ,

Yeah, seriously. Did the person you were replying to think the energy that's powering datacenters was all clean?

areyouevenreal ,

AI tech isn't pointless though. It's not just about trying to replace artists or whatever. It significantly speeds up things like programming. It's also used by scientists to mine data to find patterns and make predictions. For Pete's sake I am pretty sure climate modeling relies on AI and other forms of HPC.

whoreticulture ,

Scientists analyze data using statistics. I don't see how and LLM helps with that. And it barely helps with programming, not to the extent that it is worth the impact.

areyouevenreal ,

I wasn't just talking about LLMs. Lots of modern data analysis techniques rely on machine learning.

Although LLMs are also used by scientists to help with things like programming that not all scientists are necessarily good at or properly trained in.

3volver ,

we should be blaming the way we produce electricity

I'm also referring to emissions, just redirecting focus about HOW electricity is produced. Also, AI is not pointless, that's a bad claim. You have a comprehension issue.

whoreticulture ,

I didn't miscomprehend, you just disagree with my reasonable assertion that AI is pointless and sucks. Hope this helps!

3volver ,

I didn’t miscomprehend, you just disagree with my reasonable assertion that AI isn't pointless and sucks. Hope this helps!

slackassassin ,

That is not a reasonable assertion at all. AI is being used in more ways than what is being described in your rage-bait media diet. "AI is pointless and it sucks" is a blatantly ignorant statement.

whoreticulture ,

It's marginal utility is not worth the energy expenditures.

slackassassin ,

You just don't know what it is beyond memes.

whoreticulture ,

source: your rank asshole

slackassassin ,

Source: Implement trained cnn and gnn models in hardware for real-time particle identification and tracking for high-energy physics.

whoreticulture ,
  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • technology@lemmy.world
  • random
  • incremental_games
  • meta
  • All magazines