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 Recent data from the UK shows that the country’s outdated electricity network is holding back affordable housing projects.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.

autotldr Bot ,

This is the best summary I could come up with:


It is hardly news that the tech bubble’s self-glorification has obscured the uglier sides of this industry, from its proclivity for tax avoidance to its invasion of privacy and exploitation of our attention span.

The industry’s environmental impact is a key issue, yet the companies that produce such models have stayed remarkably quiet about the amount of energy they consume – probably because they don’t want to spark our concern.

Google’s global datacentre and Meta’s ambitious plans for a new AI Research SuperCluster (RSC) further underscore the industry’s energy-intensive nature, raising concerns that these facilities could significantly increase energy consumption.

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.

In an era where we expect businesses to do more than just make profits for their shareholders, governments need to evaluate the organisations they fund and partner with, based on whether their actions will result in concrete successes for people and the planet.

As climate scientists anticipate that global heating will exceed the 1.5C target, it’s time we approach today’s grand challenges systemically, so that the solution to one problem does not exacerbate another.


The original article contains 766 words, the summary contains 214 words. Saved 72%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

paf0 ,

Yes it does, and wait until you hear about literally every other industry.

UraniumBlazer ,

But no, AI bad AI bad AI bad AI bad lalalaa I can't hear you AI bad /s

SacredHeartAttack ,
@SacredHeartAttack@lemmy.world avatar

Seems like you’re hearing it perfectly, but not listening.

nick ,

Dumb.

LainTrain ,

"The world is complicated and scary! I don't understand it so it must be bad! M-muh planet farting cows evil industry fuck the disabled/sick/queer!" - What luddites actually believe.

Anprims/eco-fashes begone. If the planet was destroyed for the betterment of conditions for the proletariat today and future alike there'd be literally no issue, it's just some rock lol, AI is far more important. Also brutalism and soviet blocs are the best architectural styles, everything else is bourgeois cringe.

bolexforsoup , (edited )
spoiler

asdfasfasfasfas

UraniumBlazer ,

Cryptocurrencies have no real world applications. AI does.

dinckelman ,

Such as?

bolexforsoup , (edited )
spoiler

asdfasfasfasfas

Even_Adder ,

What about this?

Turun ,

I've used it to improve selected paragraphs of my writing, provide code snippets and find an old comic based on a crude description of a friend.

I feel like these interactions were valuable to me and only one (code snippets) could have been easily replaced with existing tools.

bolexforsoup , (edited )
spoiler

asdfasfasfasfas

balder1991 , (edited )

AI evangelists act like it’s already perfect and anybody who dares question the church of LLM is declared a Luddite.

I don’t think that’s the case, though. The only people I see actively “evangelizing” LLMs are either companies looking for investors or “influencers” looking for attention by tapping on people’s insecurities.

Most people just either find it useful for some specific use cases or just don’t care. And a large part actually hate on it.

FiniteBanjo ,

You're doing it right now. You're criticizing that user for saying it's okay to talk about AI's failures. You're the example, evangelizing and shilling. My advice: STFU.

balder1991 ,

You're doing it right now. You're criticizing that user for saying it's okay to talk about AI's failures. You're the example, evangelizing and shilling. My advice: STFU.

It seems like you missed the memo on reading comprehension. I literally quoted the exact part I'm criticizing, which clearly isn't what you claimed.

And being overly emotional and telling people to STFU online? That's a masterclass in civility right there.

FiniteBanjo ,

Ohmahgosh you're so right, I see it now, you telling them they were wrong to criticize AI was in fact the correct take all along. You've shown me the way, All Hail AI. ALL HAIL AI.

What a fucking shill.

LainTrain ,

That's wrong, I buy drugs online with cryptocurrencies all the time to this day and have done it long before the normies showed up and turned it into a mostly financial scam.

Evading the man and LEOs when the law ain't right is my god-given right and I'm thankful to be born in the age of onions and crypto.

bolexforsoup , (edited )
spoiler

asdfasfasfasfas

LainTrain ,

Good, I hate cryptobros and aibros and artbros and luddites and industrialists and environmentalists, but I love communal living, hate cities, love AI (and AI art), love art (and craft of said art), love nature & the environment and animals, hate vegans, and love science and industry etc.

At this point I have such an ultra-niche hyper-specific take on this (and almost everything) that I feel completely out of touch with most people which seem at first glance to navigate mostly by vibes and emotions of how they feel about a vague aesthetic sense of modernity that day.

AIhasUse ,

If you could hold your breath long enough to get out of your first world bubble, you would be able to see that bitcoin is massively popular amongst people who need ways to escape their collapsing fiat currencies. It is hilarious how spoiled people who happen to be born in countries where everything is taken care of them are too thick and compationless to even consider that other people have actual problems.

bolexforsoup , (edited )
spoiler

asdfasfasfasfas

AIhasUse ,

I'm lucky enough to be from a country with a relatively stable fiat currency, although it is unclear how much longer that will be the case. In order to protect the value I've gained from my work, I do hold some of it in Bitcoin. I also use it to support charitable efforts in less fortunate countries. It is an excellent way to transfer value to exactly who I want to transfer it to without giving massive fees to banks and other companies that facilitate the transfer of funds.

A big thing to remember is that whenever you hold any countries currency, you are basically giving them a blank check to your energy. You are telling them that they can have as much of the value that you have saved that they want. When they print more money, they are taking that value directly from you. It is one thing to pay taxes on income, property, and goods purchased and sold, but on top of that, they have the ability to extract extra value from you just by running their printers. The more you believe that a government represents you and has your best wishes at heart, the more you should be holding their currency.

Krauerking ,

I'm lucky enough to be from a country with a relatively stable fiat currency,

Oh my God that's hilarious that you are just making up a strawman of it being helpful for reasons you don't even use.

What a weird libertarian crypto shill perspective that is so absolutely unhelpful for anyone.

AIhasUse ,

[Thread, post or comment was deleted by the moderator]

  • Loading...
  • AIhasUse ,

    Just so you know, you are entirely misunderstanding what the term "strawman" is used to refer to. In general, it will make you at least appear to be intelligent if you use words in the proper context.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

    I didn't set up any opposing point of view to argue with. No matter what your view on this issue is, that simply isn't what I've done in this situation.

    Despite the fact that we are on different sides of an issue, I was still able to help you with something that may prevent you from looking stupid in the future. See how that works? Someone doing something to help someone other than themself.

    Krauerking ,

    Nah.
    You created your own fake argument for crypto currency despite not using it that way and not being the conversation when it's about energy use.

    You built your own strawman. Of an imaginary person that is benefiting in a way that makes you feel better.

    You are also condescending. It doesn't make you right in an argument it makes you self assured and self serving. Looks like I was helpful too.

    AIhasUse ,

    They are not imaginary. There are millions of them. I've met many of them, and so can you if you ever decide that people from poorer countries are worth your time.

    And again, that simply isn't what a strawman is. Read the link. Everything else aside, you are not using that word in the way people use it. It is as if you are insisting French people say "bone apple tea" before they eat, and then you are calling my condescending for letting you know that you misheard it. I understand it can be hard to admit when you were mistaken, but quite frankly, it will end up causing less harm to your ego in the long run if you do.

    Krauerking ,

    You are just full of slightly wrong information aren't you.

    That is what a straw man is. It's an argument that you make up for the purpose of having an easy win. You even keep making emotional attacks to belittle your opponent. You are making Ad Hominem attacks to make me seem completely out of touch with poor people when I am one but you don't know cause you didn't ask and assumed.

    Literally an example is getting bribed and buying a dog and when people complain about the bribe you say people don't like dogs but you do.

    "Crypto is hurting the planet."

    Well actually it's helping poor people that I am not one of but are totally aided by this.

    Also a "Bone Apple Tea" is when someone says something like "as the Japanese say Sorry-naw-ra" you are wrong goodbye.

    AIhasUse ,

    I understand that Bone Apple Tea is a different type of mistake then what you are making. I was just pointing out that you were misunderstanding something, and when someone corrects you, you get defensive instead of trying to learn.

    Someone said crypto has no use, I pointed out that for millions of people, it does have a use. You may not like this fact, but that doesn't make the response invalid.

    Krauerking ,

    *than

    AIhasUse ,

    Thank you!

    bolexforsoup , (edited )
    spoiler

    asdfasfasfasfas

    AIhasUse ,

    I have lived in countries like what I've described and spent much time with people who are from there, and I financially support people from such places. I see nothing wrong with sharing their situation with people who think they know everything about how a technology is used when they clearly do not.

    Yes, I assume you and others are from privileged societies based on your perspective and the things you say. Sometimes, it is very obvious when people have lived their lives in very specific environments.

    The way you come across is as someone who doesn't see any use in getting to know people from societies very different from your own. Simultaneously, you want to feel like you have the correct way of seeing the world, and anyone who sees it differently must be malicious and playing some sort of trick on you. Whenever you feel like you have it all figured out, that's when you should be looking for your blind spot.

    bolexforsoup , (edited )
    spoiler

    asdfasfasfasfas

    AIhasUse ,

    If you lived or have been around people struggling with collapsing currencies, then you wouldn't be so naive and bitter towards the solutions that many are using.

    bolexforsoup ,

    👍

    Krauerking ,

    You ever think you project a lot on others?

    bolexforsoup ,

    No no see he has lived among the common people that one spring break, he alone can advocate for their interests. Eat, Pray, Love is basically about him. He is enlightened now.

    AIhasUse ,

    Not me alone. I can't advocate for them as well as they can for themselves. It must drive you nuts that so many people stand up for the Gazans.

    bolexforsoup , (edited )

    Wow you really are just flinging shit at the wall and seeing what sticks aren’t you?

    Some of us have actually seen stun grenades go off and had their cameras broken by police officers. Don’t even try to convince me you’ve been there with me. After all, sometimes it’s very obvious when people have lived their lives in very specific environments. Right?

    AIhasUse ,

    I'm sorry about your camera. That genuinely must have been really scary. It is great to have those kinds of experiences in your life. I hope you continue to have a passion to stand up for what you believe in, even when other people try to intimidate you and belittle you out of what you know to be true and good.

    bolexforsoup ,

    Don’t try and high road me after all the nasty things you said about me for no reason other than you’re a petty, small person who couldn’t stand seeing the pristine name “crypto” besmirched. You don’t know shit about me or what I’ve been through.

    Fuck off. I’m just blocking you. Don’t bother responding. Be a better person.

    AIhasUse ,

    99.99% of crypto is rubbish. If you think I said something incorrect, then point it out and ask for an explanation. Discussion isn't nearly as awful as you are making it out to be.

    Krauerking ,

    They do this "I'm taking the high road" after saying incredibly rude and directly insulting things and responds as if the upset people are wrong.

    I truly don't know if they are confused why their tactic isn't working or is just a very deeply seated self absorbed individual, and thinks of themselves as truly the only person that can be correct with zero nuance.

    bolexforsoup ,

    Honestly I should’ve known better than to take their bait. I should’ve blocked them the moment they showed up.

    gandalf_der_12te ,
    @gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de avatar

    tbh if you're worried about fiat currency, you shouldn't be investing in crypto currency (which is even more volatile imo) but instead in real, physical assets (such as food and housing).

    Then again, i believe that the big problems can only be solved by repairing the society as a whole. Investing in your own wealth, imo, isn't worth it. But your choice is yours.

    AIhasUse ,

    Almost nobody who has ever purchased bitcoin and held onto it until now has lost anything*. This is not the case for ANY fiat currency on earth. There is a very good reason that so many people are flocking to it as a store of value. Holding value in real estate is a good idea, but most food loses its value even faster than the worst fiat currencies.

    *The exception here is a small handful that happened to have purchased only in the last few weeks, and they have only lost about 1% of their value.

    bolexforsoup ,

    and held onto it until now

    That part of your argument is doing a lot of heavy lifting.

    AIhasUse ,

    Not that heavy - this is much more than can be said of any fiat currency. Especially the ones that are in rapid collapse compared to the main players, like USD or EUR. A currency that can hold value is the difference of being able to feed your family or not for a lot of people.

    bolexforsoup ,

    Oh it’s you. Enjoy your weekend.

    AIhasUse ,

    Thanks! You too!

    Turun ,

    Crypto is basically cash for online transactions. Pretty niche, but cool and definitely in demand for some situations.

    Just how in the real world you're shit outta luck if you lose your wallet. Or if you give someone money, but they laugh you in the face you can either cut your losses or try your luck in a fist fight. It's the same with crypto.

    With banks you have a separate authority that can handle all these cases, which is desirable in 99% of all transactions.

    Unfortunately it's volatile af, and the most popular crypto currency (Bitcoin)has untenable transaction costs and transaction limitations (10 transactions per second, globally - what a stupid design decision)

    BlushedPotatoPlayers ,

    As far as I know there would be, it's just that nobody is using them that way

    manuallybreathing ,

    Yeah! Accelerating societal collapse!

    paf0 ,

    To be fair, crypto will never stand a chance against fiat as a means for payments because governments ensure that it's complicated to tax. However, the underlying blockchain technology remains very interesting to me as a means of getting around middlemen companies.

    masterspace ,

    "aI AnD cRyPtO aRe ThE sAmE bRo"

    You know that your take that they both must suck in the exact same ways just because tech bros get hyped about them, is literally just as shallow, surface level, and uninformed as most tech bros?

    Like yeah man, tech hype cycles suck. But you know what else was once a tech hype cycle? Computers, the internet, smartphones. Sometimes they are legitimate, sometimes not.

    AI is solving an entirely new class of problem that computers have been literally unable to solve for their entire existence. Crypto was solving the problem of making a database without a single admin. One of those is a lot more important and foundational than the other.

    On top of that, crypto algorithms are fundamentally based on "proof of work", i.e. literally wasting more energy than other miners in the network is a fundamental part of how their algorithm functions. Meaning that with crypto there is basically no value prop to society and it inherently tries to waste energy, neither is the case for AI.

    Plus guess how much energy everyone streaming 4K video would take if we were all doing it on CPUs and unoptimized GPUs?

    Orders of magnitude more power than every AI model put together.

    But guess what? Instead we invented 4k decoding chips that are optimized to redner 4k signals at the hardware level so that they don't use much power, and now every $30 fire stick can decode a 4k signal on a 5V usb power supply.

    That's also where we're at with the first Neural Processing Units only just hitting the market now.

    bolexforsoup , (edited )
    spoiler

    asdfasfasfasfas

    masterspace ,

    Sure, uninformed tech hypebois suck in the same way, but the arguments around crypto and AI, especially around energy usage, are fundamentally not the same.

    bolexforsoup , (edited )
    spoiler

    asdfasfasfasfas

    masterspace ,

    Someone posted a shitty article about AI and power usage, someone pointed out that literally every industry uses a ton of power but AI gets clicks, you said AI and Crypto bros are the same.

    If you don't mean to imply that the counter arguments around AI and Crypto in terms of energy use are the same then write better given the context of the conversation.

    And posting another shitty article that just talks about power usage going up across literally all types of industry, including just normal data centers and manufacturing plants, and then vaguely talking about chatGPT's power usage compared to Google search to try and make it sound like those things are connected, is not having a serious discussion about it.

    It's skimming a clickbait headline of a clickbait article and regurgitating the implication in it like it's a fact.

    bolexforsoup , (edited )
    spoiler

    asdfasfasfasfas

    technocrit ,

    Cryptos have drastically reduced their energy consumption through technological improvements.

    That's why nobody complains about crypto energy consumption anymore. It's just bitcoin.

    But these LLMs just need more and more with no end in sight.

    bolexforsoup , (edited )
    spoiler

    asdfasfasfasfas

    AIhasUse ,

    Funny how 99.99% of cryptos shrivel up and die while bitcoin continues to serve people all over the world and is constantly becoming more and more popular. Maybe if you lived with, or even gave a shit about, people in below average wealth countries you would understand why Bitcoin is so useful to them.

    AIhasUse ,

    Go on benefiting from the people who actually do stuff while simultaneously whining about it. You've been using AI for 20 years, you're just too thick to know about it. There are millions of people in 2nd and 3rd world countries who have had their lives massively improved thanks to bitcoin, you're just too spoiled and naive and to give a shit about them. Climb down off your soap box and go read something beyond the headline.

    bolexforsoup , (edited )
    spoiler

    asdfasfasfasfas

    lvxferre ,
    @lvxferre@mander.xyz avatar

    That other poster is using a disingenuous debate tactic called "whataboutism". Basically shifting the focus from what's being criticised (AI resource consumption) to something else (other industries).

    Your comparison with evangelists is spot on. In my teen years I used to debate with creationists quite a bit; they were always

    • oversimplifying complex matters
    • showing blatant lack of reading comprehension, and distorting/lying what others say
    • vomiting certainty on things that they assumed, and re-eating their own vomit
    • showing complete inability to take context into account when interpreting what others say
    • chain-gunning fallacies
    • "I'm not religious, but..."

    always to back up something as idiotic as "the world is 6kyo! Evolution is a lie!".

    Does it ring any bell for people who discuss with AI evangelists? For me, all of them.

    (Sorry bolexforsoup for the tone - it is not geared towards you.)

    bolexforsoup , (edited )
    spoiler

    asdfasfasfasfas

    index ,

    You are on lemmy, a decentralized and open platform. Cryptos are to money what lemmy is to their centralized and proprietary counterpart.

    BrianTheeBiscuiteer ,

    Guys guys! There's room for all of us to eat our fair share of natural resources and doom the planet together!

    whoreticulture ,

    Difference is that AI is absolutely pointless lmao

    wewbull ,

    So... Absolutely need to be aware of the impact of what we do in the tech sphere, but there's a few things in the article that give me pause:

    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.

    1. "Could". More likely it was closed loop.
    2. Water isn't single use, so even if true how does this big number matter.

    What matter is the electrical energy converted to heat. How much was it and where did that heat go?

    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.

    Can you say non sequitur ?

    The outdated network holding back housing is that it doesn't go to the right places with the capacity needed for the houses. Not that OpenAIUK is consuming so much that there's no power left. To use a simily, there's plenty of water but the pipes aren't in place.

    This article is well intentioned FUD, but FUD none the less.

    5714 ,

    700.000 litres also sounds like much more than 700 m³. The average German citizen consumed 129 litres per day or roughly 47 m³ annually. The water consumption of 15 people is less than most blocks.

    Energy consumption might be a real problem, but I don't see how water consumption is that big of a problem or priority here.

    AbidanYre , (edited )

    The average German citizen consumed 129 litres per day

    That seems like a lot. Where are you getting that number?

    Edit: consumes = uses not drinks

    veeesix ,
    @veeesix@lemmy.ca avatar

    A quick search says 3.7L is the recommended intake for men, and 2.7L for women. Forget AI, Germans appear to be the real resource guzzlers!

    Orvanis ,

    Here "consume" means far more than just "drank". If you take a shower at home, you are consuming water. Wash your car? Consume water. Water your garden? Consume water.

    veeesix , (edited )
    @veeesix@lemmy.ca avatar

    Aha! That makes a lot more sense with that framing.

    EDIT: In 2019 in Canada the daily residential average was 215L per day. 129L seems like a dream in contrast.

    5C5C5C ,

    I imagine the number goes up considerably when you account for showering, washing clothes and dishes, and water used while cooking. It would go up even more if you account for the water used to produce the food consumed by the individual.

    CellarRat ,

    I would assume that includes stuff like toilets,baths,showers,dishes and hand washing etc as fresh water uses. Either that or Germans are the ultimate hydrohommie.

    shocks ,

    The EPA states that each American uses an average of 82 gallons or 310.4 litres a day (study from 2015). Source: https://www.epa.gov/watersense/statistics-and-facts

    FaceDeer ,
    @FaceDeer@fedia.io avatar

    Liters are a great unit for making small things seem large. I've seen articles breathlessly talking about how "almost 2000 liters of oil was spilled!" When 2000 liters could fit in the back of a pickup truck.

    Water "consumption" is also a pretty easy to abuse term since water isn't really consumed, it can be recycled endlessly. Whether some particular water use is problematic depends very much on the local demands on the water system, and that can be accounted for quite simply by market means - charge data centers money for their water usage and they'll naturally move to where there's plenty of cheap water.

    5714 ,

    Oil is different because 1 ppm can ruin a whole litre or something in that direction.

    TheGrandNagus , (edited )

    Assuming that's true, most of the oil tends to clump together. 2000L doesn't just perfectly disperse out across billions of litres of water, contaminating everything.

    nyan ,

    Liters are a great unit for making small things seem large. I’ve seen articles breathlessly talking about how “almost 2000 liters of oil was spilled!” When 2000 liters could fit in the back of a pickup truck.

    That just means you have no intuitive sense of how large a litre is. If they'd written it as "2000 quarts" (which is close enough to being the same volume at that level of rounding) would it have painted a clearer picture in your head?

    FaceDeer ,
    @FaceDeer@fedia.io avatar

    I'm Canadian. Milk comes in liters.

    If you're saying that 2 cubic meters can't fit in the back of a pickup truck, here's some truck capacities. A cubic yard is 0.764555 cubic meters, so a full sized pickup can hold 3.4 cubic meters of cargo.

    WalnutLum ,

    It's usually not the water itself but the energy used to "systemize" water from out-of-system sources

    Pumping, pressurization, filtering, purifying all take additional energy.

    hummingbird ,

    “Could”. More likely it was closed loop.
    As I understand it this is an estimate, thus the word "could". This has nothing to do with using closed or open look water cooling.
    Water isn’t single use, so even if true how does this big number matter.

    The point they are trying to make is that fresh water is not a limitless resource and increasing usage has various impacts, for example on market prices.

    The outdated network holding back housing is that it doesn’t go to the right places with the capacity needed for the houses. Not that OpenAIUK is consuming so much that there’s no power left. To use a simily, there’s plenty of water but the pipes aren’t in place.

    The point being made is that resources are allocated to increase network capacity for hyped tech and not for current, more pressing needs.

    Thekingoflorda ,
    @Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world avatar

    Is there a reason it needs to be fresh water? Is sea water less effective?

    HubertManne ,
    @HubertManne@kbin.social avatar

    corrosion

    Thekingoflorda ,
    @Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world avatar

    Oh makes sense.

    lvxferre ,
    @lvxferre@mander.xyz avatar

    Not just corrosion, but also to prevent precipitation in evaporative cooling systems (the most common ones).

    Evaporative systems require constant input of new water; if you're adding saltwater the salt will concentrate and it'll become a saturated brine, and once the brine evaporates a bit the salt precipitates. It'll happen mostly on the cooling fills (that will need to be replaced more constantly), but the main issue is that some precipitate does get carried by the brine and clogs the pipes.

    morbidcactus ,

    A lot of industry does use grey water or untreated water for cooling as it's substantially cheaper to filter it and add chemicals to it yourself. What's even cheaper is to have a cooling tower and reuse your water, in the volumes it's used at industrial scales it's really expensive to just dump down the drain (which you also get charged for), when I worked as a maintenance engineer I recall saving something like 1m cad minimum a year by changing the fill level in our cooling tower as it would drop to a level where it'd trigger city water backups to top up the levels to avoid running dry, and that was a single processing line.

    lvxferre ,
    @lvxferre@mander.xyz avatar

    “Could”. More likely it was closed loop.

    Nope. Here's how data centres use water.

    It boils down to two things - cooling and humidification. Humidification is clearly not a closed loop, so I'll focus on the cooling:

    • cold water runs through tubes, chilling the air inside the data centre
    • the water is now hot
    • hot water is exposed to outside air, some evaporates, the leftover is colder and reused.

    Since some evaporates you'll need to put more water into the system. And there's an additional problem: salts don't evaporate, they concentrate over time, precipitate, and clog your pipes. Since you don't want this you'll eventually need to flush it all out. And it also means that you can't simply use seawater for that, it needs to be freshwater.

    Water isn’t single use, so even if true how does this big number matter.

    Freshwater renews at a limited rate.

    What matter is the electrical energy converted to heat. How much was it and where did that heat go?

    Mostly to the air, as promoting the evaporation of the water.

    Can you say non sequitur ?

    More like non sequere than non sequitur. Read the whole paragraph:

    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. This will only get worse as households move away from using fossil fuels and rely more on electricity, putting even more pressure on the National Grid. In Bicester, for instance, plans to build 7,000 new homes were paused because the electricity network didn’t have enough capacity.

    The author is highlighting that electrical security is already bad for you Brits, for structural reasons; it'll probably get worse due to increased household consumption; and with big tech consuming it, it'll get even worse.

    Thrashy ,
    @Thrashy@lemmy.world avatar

    Data center cooling towers can be closed- or open-loop, and even operate in a hybrid mode depending on demand and air temps/humidity. Problem is, the places where open-loop evaporative cooling works best are arid, low-humidity regions where water is a scarce resource to start.

    On the other hand, several of the FAANGS are building datacenters right now in my area, where we're in the watershed of the largest river in the country, it's regularly humid and rainy, any water used in a given process is either treated and released back into the river, or fairly quickly condenses back out of the atmosphere in the form of rain somewhere a few hundred miles further east (where it will eventually collect back into the same river). The only way that water is "wasted" in this environment has to do with the resources used to treat and distribute it. However, because it's often hot and humid around here, open loop cooling isn't as effective, and it's more common to see closed-loop systems.

    Bottom line, though, I think the siting of water-intensive industries in water-poor parts of the country is a governmental failure, first and foremost. States like Arizona in particular have a long history of planning as though they aren't in a dry desert that has to share its only renewable water resource with two other states, and offering utility incentives to potential employers that treat that resource as if it's infinite. A government that was focused on the long-term viability of the state as a place to live rather than on short-term wins that politicians can campaign on wouldn't be making those concessions.

    lvxferre ,
    @lvxferre@mander.xyz avatar

    They can be closed-loop as in your region but they usually aren't - besides the problem that you mentioned, a closed loop increases electricity consumption (as you'll need a heat pump instead), and electricity consumption is also a concern. Not for the environmental impact (corporations DGAF), but price.

    snooggums ,
    @snooggums@midwest.social avatar

    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.

    Mixing and matching abstract measurements doesn't work when comparing two things.

    Womble , (edited )

    it actually is an enlightening comparison when you dig into it. It's saying that the energy required to power one play of a song is 4e4*365/5e9 of the energy to heat a home for one day. That comes out to about 0.3%, i.e. if you watch a three minute youtube video three times and do absolutely nothing else that day but heat your house (dont use any other electricity, dont eat anything, dont travel anywhere) you increase your energy usage by a total of 1%

    snooggums ,
    @snooggums@midwest.social avatar

    I can't tell if this is serious since most homes don't need heated every day...

    Womble ,

    Yes, averages are a thing.

    snooggums ,
    @snooggums@midwest.social avatar

    Why have an average for something that is seasonal?

    Womble ,

    Because its a comparison, no one cares how much energy playing a video uses compared to heating your house on may the 5th as opposed to december the 12.

    LainTrain ,

    They definitely do for most of the year, though?

    snooggums ,
    @snooggums@midwest.social avatar

    Depends on location and personal preferences. Most of the US, which the article appears to be usung for home heating numbers, only needs to heat homes for a few months during the year. Sure, New York and Denver might be over half the year but Florida and southern California don't need much heating at all.

    LainTrain ,

    Oh yeah, in extreme hot temperature AC-year-round no snow countries like the US maybe

    Kaboom ,

    Yeah thats bullshit. Unless you have a hyper efficient heating system and power your internet with a badly tuned 1950s generator, theres no way youre getting 1%.

    Kaboom ,

    Yeah thats bullshit. Unless you have a hyper efficient heating system and power your internet with a badly tuned 1950s generator, theres no way youre getting 1%.

    Womble ,

    this includes the power used on the back end, not just the power used by the end user.

    cogman ,

    It does not work like that.

    The problem with such statements is the energy costs are nowhere near fixed. The amount of energy needed to play a song on my iPod shuffle through a wired headset is wildly different from the power needed to play that same song on my TV through my home theater equipment.

    The same is true on the backend. The amount of power Google spends serving up a wildly popular band is way less than what they burn serving up an unknown Indy band's video. That's because the popular band's music will have been pre-optimized by Google to save on bandwidth and computing resources. When something is popular, it's in their best interests to reduce the computational costs (ie power consumption) associated with serving that content.

    Womble ,

    I was just using the numbers given in the article, presumably its an average including any sort of caching.

    errer ,

    4e4 not 4e5, 4e5 is 400,000.

    Womble ,

    sorry yes, typed it wrong, right final number though

    misk ,
    @misk@sopuli.xyz avatar

    It's a new blockchain. It'll fizzle out but we'll come up with a new buzzword by then.

    pennomi ,

    It won’t fizzle out; it already has legitimate business use cases. (A lot fewer than the marketing bros want you to believe, but real use cases nonetheless.) Blockchain and Augmented Reality never reached this point, so they fizzled. We’ll see a huge AI winter soon just like we did in the dot com bust in 2000.

    perviouslyiner , (edited )

    Arguably that may be related - cryptocurrency people needed a new thing to prop up their Nvidia shares, and "AI" fills that niche.

    misk , (edited )
    @misk@sopuli.xyz avatar

    Ding ding ding

    [edit] Ah, crypto bros are here, it explains a lot.

    explodicle ,

    Why would they hold Nvidia shares and not just crypto?

    bolexforsoup , (edited )
    spoiler

    asdfasfasfasfas

    misk , (edited )
    @misk@sopuli.xyz avatar

    It will not be economically viable once AI companies have to pay for their training data. So far they made some deals with press/media but multimedia is a can of worms that's waiting to explode in our faces. They're getting away with this because doing things and then asking for permission / forgiveness is a very Sillicon Valley thing to do, for now.

    Technology itself seems to be in a plateau. The whole AI computer thing is just moving computation offline because amounts of energy needed are unsustainable and have to be dumped on consumers. We haven't seen that much progress since ChatGPT took the world by storm.

    I'm not saying AI is a fad. It's revolutionizing medical research for example, and those industries actually own the data they're training AI on. EU sees this and is currently working on streamlining exchanging this data across member states too.

    HubertManne ,
    @HubertManne@kbin.social avatar

    thing is that few if any use cases for blockchain were found and any actual useful things would not require much energy. The high energy crypto itself does nothing useful over more efficient alternatives and I don't know what you mean by fizzle out but it still uses massive amounts of energy. the language models unfortunately do things that are useful and is much more likely to keep drawing power.

    bolexforsoup ,

    And the really perverted incentive of crypto is that due to the way difficulty is done, in particular with PoW systems, the more adoption there is the more energy intensive it becomes. Scaling actually leads to more inefficiency by design. I mean it’s totally asinine.

    HubertManne ,
    @HubertManne@kbin.social avatar

    oh yeah. in the end you have a system that creates artificial value by requiring the sacrifice of real value. heres one credit for burning a barrel of oil. oh now you have to burn 2 to get a credit, now its 4, now its 8.

    Krauerking ,

    And crypto bros somehow think that this means they are buying energy.... But you can't get it back after it's burned.

    HubertManne ,
    @HubertManne@kbin.social avatar

    yeah. funny thing is there is like gridcoin which is perfectly fine because it uses the energy for useful work but they don't like it because it does not have the pyramid scheme artifical value increase. Its value by and large stays in line with energy prices (although if you look historically there is this hilarious spike when idiots were grabbing at everything crypto. it pretty much shows the point in time where cypto became a buzzword thing)

    WallEx ,

    New technologies will sometimes need more energy. Thats hardly news. If we continue yo switch to renewables the impact will also be small. AI isnt even listed as its own point, heck it is not even listed in most energy budgets, yet it sounds like there will be no energy left for the rest, which is laughable, since it likely uses around 1% of the energy needed (its estimated at 2% for it in general)

    MxM111 ,

    This is horrible article. The only number given related to LLM is 700,000 liters of water used, which is honestly minuscule in impact on environment. And then there are speculations of “what if water used in aria where there is no water”. It is on the level of “if cats had wings, why don’t they fly”.

    Everything we do in modern would consumes energy. Air conditioners, public transport, watching TV, getting food, making elections… exactly the same article (without numbers and with lots of hand waving) could have written. “What if we start having elections in Sahara? Think about all the scorpions we disturb!”

    tsonfeir ,
    @tsonfeir@lemmy.world avatar

    Yeah is sounds like some anti-AI person looked for a reason to be mad

    9point6 ,

    Yeah was gonna say this, seems like someone stopped a couple of steps away from discovering that basically the entire modern world is built on top of unsustainable consumption.

    FonsNihilo ,

    [Thread, post or comment was deleted by the author]

  • Loading...
  • tsonfeir ,
    @tsonfeir@lemmy.world avatar

    More likely someone who knows how to properly use ChatGPT took their previous job

    TheGrandNagus ,

    I have an overall good opinion of the guardian as a news source, but almost every time I see an opinion piece on their site, it's utter dogshit. It's as if they go out of their way to find the absolute worst articles.

    But they do get shared a lot, which I guess is what they were going for?

    MxM111 ,

    They are really left leaning, not balanced, and it shows in their opinions, but also in news selection. Since fediverse is also left or even significantly left leaning, it gets shared a lot here.

    GiveOver ,

    Straight up misleading. Mentioning AI in the headline and then sneakily switching to "the cloud" (i.e. most of the internet) when discussing figures. They say it uses a similar amount to commercial flights? Fine. Ground the flights, I'd rather have the internet a million times over.

    doylio ,

    It's anti-tech propaganda. The same is happening with crypto. Certain groups don't like it, so they try to convince the public that it is bad for the environment so it will be banned

    dinckelman ,

    So when exactly is all of this going to stop? First we had town-scale crypto farms, that were juicing enough energy to leave other people with no electricity. Then we switched to NFTs, and the inefficient ever-growing blockchain, and now we're back to square one with PISS, and it telling people to put glue on pizza, and suicide off the golden gate bridge

    masterspace ,

    Crypto and proof of work algorithms inherently waste energy.

    AI using a lot of energy is like 4k video using a lot of energy, yeah, it does right now, but that's because we're not running it on dedicated hardware specifically designed for it.

    If we decoded 4k videos using software at the rate we watch 4k videos, we'd already have melted both ice caps.

    LainTrain ,

    AI bad though!

    LainTrain ,

    Never. Cope and seethe luddite. Btw AI plagiarizes less than humans. Back to Reddit, now!

    dinckelman ,

    I hope i can become this delusional one day. Life would be so much easier

    LainTrain ,

    Bruh you're projecting harder than an IMAX cinema

    explodicle ,

    It's going to stop when the price of energy reflects its external cost. Externalities are very well understood by economists, so big oil has convinced us to go after consumers instead.

    We need a Green New Deal, not a villain of the week.

    QuadratureSurfer ,
    @QuadratureSurfer@lemmy.world avatar

    You know what's ironic? We're all communicating on a decentralized network which is inefficient when compared to a centralized network.

    I'm sure we could nitpick and argue over what's the most efficient solution for every little thing, but at the end of the day we need to see if the pros outweigh the cons.

    LainTrain ,

    I highly doubt the "people" downvoting the nerds here understand what a decentralised network is, I bet some of them think Lemmy is just an app owned by a megacorp somewhere. How it works must be like magic to the unwashed .world masses.

    _sideffect ,

    We all know this, and we all know the "ai" they have right now is anything but that.

    But these companies are making billions from this gold rush hype, so they could give two shits about the planet

    QuadratureSurfer ,
    @QuadratureSurfer@lemmy.world avatar

    This article may as well be trying to argue that we're wasting resources by using "cloud gaming" or even by gaming on your own, PC.

    blargerer ,

    Gaming actually provides a real benefit for people, and resources spent on it mostly linearly provide that benefit (yes some people are addicted or etc, but people need enriching activities and gaming can be such an activity in moderation).

    AI doesn't provide much benefit yet, outside of very narrow uses, and its usefulness is mostly predicated on its continued growth of ability. The problem is pretrained transformers have stopped seeing linear growth with injection of resources, so either the people in charge admit its all a sham, or they push non linear amounts of resources at it hoping to fake growing ability long enough to achieve a new actual breakthrough.

    QuadratureSurfer ,
    @QuadratureSurfer@lemmy.world avatar

    I'm going to assume that when you say "AI" you're referring to LLMs like chatGPT. Otherwise I can easily point to tons of benefits that AI models provide to a wide variety of industries (and that are already in use today).

    Even then, if we restrict your statement to LLMs, who are you to say that I can't use an LLM as a dungeon master for a quick round of DnD? That has about as much purpose as gaming does, therefore it's providing a real benefit for people in that aspect.

    Beyond gaming, LLMs can also be used for brainstorming ideas, summarizing documents, and even for help with generating code in every programming language. There are very real benefits here and they are already being used in this way.

    And as far as resources are concerned, there are newer models being released all the time that are better and more efficient than the last. Most recently we had Llama 3 released (just last month), so I'm not sure how you're jumping to conclusions that we've hit some sort of limit in terms of efficiency with resources required to run these models (and that's also ignoring the advances being made at a hardware level).

    Because of Llama 3, we're essentially able to have something like our own personal GLaDOS right now:
    https://www.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1csnexs/local_glados_now_running_on_windows_11_rtx_2060/

    https://github.com/dnhkng/GlaDOS

    technocrit ,

    Otherwise I can easily point to tons of benefits that AI models provide to a wide variety of industries

    Go ahead and point. I'm going to assume when you say "AI" that you mean almost anything except actual intelligence.

    QuadratureSurfer ,
    @QuadratureSurfer@lemmy.world avatar

    I think you're confusing "AI" with "AGI".

    "AI" doesn't mean what it used to and if you use it today it encompasses a very wide range of tech including machine learning models:

    Speech to text (STT), text to speech (TTS), Generative AI for text (LLMs), images (Midjourney/Stable Diffusion), audio (Suno). Upscaling, Computer Vision (object detection, etc).

    But since you're looking for AGI there's nothing specific to really point at since this doesn't exist.

    Edit: typo

    technocrit , (edited )

    Speech to text (STT), text to speech (TTS), Generative AI for text (LLMs), images (Midjourney/Stable Diffusion), audio (Suno). Upscaling, Computer Vision (object detection, etc).

    Yes, this is exactly what I meant. Anything except actual intelligence. Do bosses from video games count?

    I think it's smart to shift the conversation away from AI to ML, but that's part of my point. There is a huge gulf between ML and AGI that AI purports to fill but it doesn't. AI is precisely that hype.

    If "AI doesn't mean what it used to", what does it mean now? What are the scientific criteria for this classification? Or is it just a profitable buzzword that can be attached to almost anything?

    But since you’re looking for AGI there’s nothing specific to really point at since this doesn’t exist.

    Yes, it doesn't exist.

    QuadratureSurfer , (edited )
    @QuadratureSurfer@lemmy.world avatar

    Edit: Ok it really doesn't help when you edit your comment to provide clarification on something based on my reply as well as including additional remarks.


    I mean, that's kind of the whole point of why I was trying to nail down what the other user meant when they said "AI doesn't provide much benefit yet".

    The definition of "AI" today is way too broad for anyone to make statements like that now.

    And to make sure I understand your question, are you asking me to provide you with the definition of "AI"? Or are you asking for the definition of "AGI"?

    Do bosses from video games count?

    Count under the broad definition of "AI"?
    Yes, when we talk about bosses from video games we talk about "AI" for NPCs. And no, this should not be lumped in with any machine learning models unless the game devs created a model for controlling that NPCs behaviour.

    In either case our current NPC AI logic should not be classified as AGI by any means (which should be implied since this does not exist as far as we know).

    AIhasUse ,

    You read too many headlines and not enough papers. There is a massive list of advancements that AI has brought about. Hell, there is even a massive list of advancements that you personally benefit from daily. You might not realize it, but you are constantly benefiting from super efficient methods of matrix multiplications that AI has discovered. You benefit from drugs that have been discovered by AI. Guess what what has made google the top search engine for 20 years? AI efficiency gains. The list goes on and on..

    slackassassin ,

    People in this thread think AI is just the funny screenshot they saw on social media and concluded that they are smart and AI is dumb.

    AIhasUse ,

    Absolutely. I am surprised, I would expect more from people who would end up at a site like this.

    andrew_bidlaw ,
    @andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works avatar

    It isn't resource efficient, simple as that. Machine learning isn't something new and it indeed was used for decades in one form or another. But here is the thing: when you train a model to do one task good, you can approximate learning time and the quality of it's data analyzis, say, automating the process of setting price you charge for your hotel appartments to maximize sales and profits. When you don't even know what it can do, and you don't even use a bit of it's potential, when your learning material is whatever you was dare to scrap and resources aren't a question, well, you dance and jump over the fire in the bank's vault. LLM of ChatGPT variety doesn't have a purpose or a problem to solve, we come with them after the fact, and although it's thrilling to explore what else it can do, it's a giant waste*. Remember blockchain and how everyone was trying to put it somewhere? LLMs are the same. There are niche uses that would evolve or stay as they are completely out of picture, while hyped up examples would grow old and die off unless they find their place to be. And, currently, there's no application in which I can bet my life on LLM's output. Cheers on you if you found where to put it to work as I haven't and grown irritated over seeing this buzzword everywhere.

    * What I find the most annoying with them, is that they are natural monopolies coming from the resources you need to train them to the Bard\Bing level. If they'd get inserted into every field in a decade, it means the LLM providers would have power over everything. Russian Kandinsky AI stopped to show Putin and war in the bad light, for example, OpenAI's chatbot may soon stop to draw Sam Altman getting pegged by a shy time-traveler Mikuru Asahina, and what if there would be other inobvious cases where the provider of a service just decides to exclude X from the output, like flags or mentions of Palestine or Israel? If you aren't big enough to train a model for your needs yourself, you come under their reign.

    afraid_of_zombies ,

    That is a good argument, they are natural monopolies due to the resources they need to be competitive.

    Now do we apply this elsewhere in life? Is anyone calling for Boeing to be broken up or Microsoft to be broken up or Amazon to be broken up or Facebook?

    andrew_bidlaw , (edited )
    @andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works avatar

    We are missing big time on breaking them into pieces, yes. No argument. There's something wrong if we didn't start that process a long time ago.

    QuadratureSurfer ,
    @QuadratureSurfer@lemmy.world avatar

    Ok, first off, I'm a big fan of learning new expressions where they come from and what they mean (how they came about, etc). Could you please explain this one?:

    well, you dance and jump over the fire in the bank's vault.

    And back to the original topic:

    It isn't resource efficient, simple as that.

    It's not that simple at all and it all depends on your use case for whatever model you're talking about:

    For example I could spend hours working in Photoshop to create some image that I can use as my Avatar on a website.
    Or I can take a few minutes generating a bunch of images through Stable Diffusion and then pick out one I like. Not only have I saved time in this task, but I have used less electricity.

    In another example I could spend time/electricity to watch a Video over and over again trying to translate what someone said from one language to another, or I could use Whisper to quickly translate and transcribe what was said in a matter of seconds.

    On the other hand, there are absolutely use cases where using some ML model is incredibly wasteful.
    Take, for example, a rain sensor on your car.
    Now, you could setup some AI model with a camera and computer vision to detect when to turn on your windshield wipers.
    But why do that when you could use this little sensor that shoots out a small laser against the window and when it detects a difference in the energy that's normally reflected back it can activate the windshield wipers.
    The dedicated sensor with a low power laser will use far less energy and be way more efficient for this use case.

    Cheers on you if you found where to put it to work as I haven't and grown irritated over seeing this buzzword everywhere.

    Makes sense, so many companies are jumping on this as a buzzword when they really need to stop and think if it's necessary to implement in the first place.
    Personally, I have found them great as an assistant for programming code as well as brainstorming ideas or at least for helping to point me in a good direction when I am looking into something new. I treat them as if someone was trying to remember something off the top of their head. Anything coming from an LLM should be double checked and verified before committing to it.

    And I absolutely agree with your final paragraph, that's why I typically use my own local models running on my own hardware for coding/image generation/translation/transcription/etc. There are a lot of open source models out there that anyone can retrain for more specific tasks. And we need to be careful because these larger corporations are trying to stifle that kind of competition with their lobbying efforts.

    blargerer ,

    The transformer technology did come built for a specific purpose, automated translation.

    otp ,

    AI doesn't provide much benefit yet

    Lol

    I don't understand how you can argue that gaming provides a real benefit, but AI doesn't.

    If gaming's benefit is entertainment, why not acknowledge that AI can be used for the same purpose?

    There are other benefits as well -- LLMs can be useful study tools, and can help with some aspects of coding (e.g., boilerplate/template code, troubleshooting, etc).

    If you don't know what they can be used for, that doesn't mean they don't have a use.

    technocrit ,

    If gaming’s benefit is entertainment, why not acknowledge that AI can be used for the same purpose?

    Ah yes the multi-billion dollar industry of people reading garbage summaries. Endless entertainment.

    otp ,

    Ah yes the multi-billion dollar industry of people reading garbage summaries. Endless entertainment.

    See, I'm not even sure if you're criticizing LLMs or modern journalism...lmao

    RobotZap10000 ,

    Unfortunately, they seem to be one and the same these days.

    sinedpick ,

    LLMs help with coding? In any meaningful way? That's a great giveaway that you've never actually produced and released any real software.

    explodicle ,

    FWIW I do that all the time, it's helpful for me too.

    QuadratureSurfer ,
    @QuadratureSurfer@lemmy.world avatar

    I gave up on ChatGPT for help with coding.

    But a local model that's been fine-tuned for coding? Perfection.

    It's not that you use the LLM to do everything, but it's excellent for pseudo code. You can quickly get a useful response back about most of the same questions you would search for on stack overflow (but tailored to your own code). It's also useful for issues when you're delving into a newer programming language and trying to port over some code, or trying to look at different ways of achieving the same result.

    It's just another tool in your belt, nothing that we should rely on to do everything.

    balder1991 ,

    Yeah it is a bit weak on the arguments, as it doesn’t seem to talk about trade offs?

    Rooskie91 ,

    Love how we went from "AI needs to be controlled so it doesn't turn everything into paperclips" to "QUICK, WE NEED TO TURN THE PLANET INTO PAPERCLIPS TO GET THIS AI TO WORK!!"

    technocrit ,

    ITT hella denialism.

    kilgore_trout ,
    @kilgore_trout@feddit.it avatar

    It is a little scary. Machine learning / LLMs consumes insane amounts of power, and it's under everyone's eyes.

    I was shocked a few months ago to learn that the Internet, including infrastructure and end-user devices, already consumed 30% of world energy production in 2018. We are not only digging our grave, but doing it ever faster.

    frezik , (edited )

    The Sam Altman fans also say that AI would solve climate change in a jiffy. Problem is, we already have all the tech we need to solve it. We lack the political will to do it. AI might be able to improve our tech further, but if we lack the political will now, then AI's suggestions aren't going to fix it. Not unless we're willing to subsume our governmental structures to AI. Frankly, I do not trust Sam Altman or any other techbro to create an AI that I would want to be governed by.

    What we end up with is that while AI might improve things, it almost certainly isn't worth the energy being dumped into it.

    Edit: Yes, Sam Altman does actually believe this. That's clear from his public statements about climate change and AI. Please don't get into endless "he didn't say exactly those words" debates, because that's bullshit. He justifies massive AI energy usage by saying it will totally solve climate change. Totally.

    AdrianTheFrog ,
    @AdrianTheFrog@lemmy.world avatar

    I agree that these arguments are stupid, but is anyone actually saying we should do those things?

    frezik ,
    afraid_of_zombies ,

    Seems he didn't say what you said he did. Why did you lie?

    frezik ,

    Why do you keep embarrassing yourself?

    afraid_of_zombies ,

    Posioning the well. You can admit your lies btw

    afraid_of_zombies ,

    No one is.

    afraid_of_zombies ,

    You know I have never once heard anyone saying what you are saying that they are. I personally think it would be better for us to address bad arguments that are being made instead of ones we wish existed solely so we can argue with them.

    frezik ,
    afraid_of_zombies ,

    Claim:

    "The Sam Altman fans also say that AI would solve climate change in a jiffy. "

    What he said:

    "If we spend 1% of the world's electricity training powerful AI, and that AI does figure out how to get (to carbon goals) that would be a massive win, (especially) if that 1% lets people live their lives better.”

    Were you just assuming I would take you at your word?

    frezik ,

    Check my edit in the post above, made over an hour before you posted this.

    afraid_of_zombies ,

    Actually made after I posted that. Why do you keep lying? It's messed up. This is low stakes internet comments.

    And no he didn't say what you swore he said.

    frezik ,

    Because I'm not lying, you're incapable of looking past the surface of Sam Altman's obviously self serving comments.

    afraid_of_zombies ,

    Yeah you were.

    frezik ,

    Unfortunately for you, we can actually see edit and post times on comments:

    https://midwest.social/pictrs/image/67a4cd22-4a0f-4cdb-ba6c-732e57f4cf77.png

    My comment, last edited May 30, 12:29:07 GMT-5.

    https://midwest.social/pictrs/image/a1d21b38-ddec-4fb2-9c91-b5d80abaafff.png

    Your comment, posted May 30, 1:55:04 GMT-5.

    So it wasn't an hour before. It was closer to 1.5 hours. You got me.

    This isn't just about internet points. You're defending a shithead on the basis of "he didn't say exactly those words", as if context does not exist.

    afraid_of_zombies ,

    Keep on lying. Did he say what you said he did? No? Then you lied.

    SlopppyEngineer ,

    Frankly, I do not trust Sam Altman or any other techbro to create an AI that I would want to be governed by.

    "Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them."

    ~ Frank Herbert, Dune

    frezik , (edited )

    Thing is, I could maybe be convinced that a sufficiently advanced AI would run society in a more egalitarian and equitable way than any existing government. It's not going to come from techbros, though. They will 100% make an AI that favors techbros.

    Edit: almost forgot this part. Frank Herbert built a world ruled by a highly stratified feudal empire. The end result of that no thinking machine rule isn't that good, either. He also based it on a lot of 1960s/70s ideas about drugs expanding the human mind that are just bullshit. Great novel, but its ideas shouldn't be taken at face value.

    kilgore_trout ,
    @kilgore_trout@feddit.it avatar

    we already have all the tech we need to solve it

    And we already know "how to get to carbon goals" that Altman mentioned we need AI to figure out.

    WldFyre ,

    Now look into animal farming!

    Seriously, though, our population growth rates are unsustainable, and we really better start getting in with nuclear power soon.

    kilgore_trout ,
    @kilgore_trout@feddit.it avatar

    I already look into it, I choose to be vegetarian.

    Nuclear power plants are a patch to the bigger issue, the idea of infinite progress. We need to reduce consumption.

    WldFyre ,

    Yeah but as long as our population keeps growing than I'm not sure how else we get to a sustainable world. Obviously it has to be an intentional, consensual cultural shift, I'm not suggesting forcing people to not have kids. But I didn't know how the earth doesn't just collapse at some point as long as people keep having more and more kids and our population keeps growing.

    ETA: oh and I'm vegan btw

    Teodomo ,

    Nothing like the good old magical-thinking-from-guys-who-love-logic.

    Believing oneself to be the rational one in life continues to sadly be the origin of so many blind spots in people's thinking.

    ikidd ,
    @ikidd@lemmy.world avatar

    What is this even? Batteries for UPS in a datacenter wouldn't be a patch on even a few days of production of EVs, water isn't being shipped from "drier parts of the world" to cool datacenters, and even if it were, it's not gone forever once it's used to cool server rooms.

    Absolutely, AI and crypto are a blight on the energy usage of the world and that needs to be addressed, but things like above just detract from the real problem.

    frezik ,

    The water is because datacenters have been switching to evaporative cooling to save energy. It does save energy, but at the cost of water. It doesn't go away forever, but a lot of it does end up raining down on the ocean, and we can't use it again without desalination and using even more energy.

    KevonLooney ,

    a lot of it does end up raining down on the ocean, and we can't use it again without desalination

    Where do you think rain comes from? Why do hurricanes form over the ocean?

    frezik ,

    Dude, please. If this were true, we wouldn't have water issues piling up with the rest of our climate catastrophe.

    androogee ,

    No no they've got a point. Everyone knows that the invisible hand of the free market and the invisible hand of the replenishing water table just reach out, shake hands, and agree to work it all out.

    Jarix ,

    Rainforests. Like the Amazon that is being deforested obscenely in some areas

    everyone_said ,

    That may all be true, but the amount of water used by these data centers is miniscule, and it seems odd to focus on it. The article cites Microsoft using 700,000 liters for ChatGPT. In comparison, a single fracking well in the same state might use 350,000,000 liters, and this water is much more contaminated. There are so many other, more substantive, issues with LLMs, why even bring water use up?

    Edit: If evaporative cooling uses less energy it might even be reducing total industrial water use, considering just how much water is used in the energy industry.

    shadearg , (edited )
    @shadearg@lemmy.world avatar

    The forefront of technology overutilizes resources?

    Always has been.

    Edit: Supercomputers have existed for 60 years.

    dustyData ,

    AI is on another completely different level of energy consumption. Consider that Sam Altman, of OpenAI, is investing on Nuclear power plants to feed directly their next iterations of AI models. That's a whole ass nuclear reactor to feed one AI model. Because the amount of energy we currently create is several magnitudes not enough for what they want. We are struggling to feed these monsters, it is nothing like how supercomputers tax the grid.

    shadearg ,
    @shadearg@lemmy.world avatar

    Supercomputers were feared to be untenable resource consumers then, too.

    Utilizing nuclear to feed AI may be the responsible and sustainable option, but there's a lot of FUD surrounding all of these things.

    One thing is certain: Humans (and now AI) will continue to advance technology, regardless of consequence.

    dustyData ,

    Would you kindly find a source for that? Supercomputers run discrete analyses or processes then halt. The big problem with these LLMs is that they run as on line services that have to be on all the time to chat with millions of users online. The fact they're never turned off is the marked difference. As far as I recall, supercomputers have always been about power efficiency and don't ever recall anyone suggesting to plug one to a nuclear reactor just to run it. Power consumption has never been the most important concern about even exaflops supercomputers.

    Another factor is that there aren't that many supercomputers in the world, a handful of thousand of them. While it takes that same number of servers, which are less energy efficient and run 24/7 all year, to keep an LLM service up and available to the public with 5 nines. That alone overruns even the most power hungry supercomputers in the world.

    shadearg , (edited )
    @shadearg@lemmy.world avatar

    Would you kindly find a source for that?

    I can personally speak from the 80s, so that's not exactly a golden age of reliable information. There was concern about scale of infinite growth and power requirements in a perpetual 24/7 full-load timeshare by people that were almost certainly not qualified to talk about the subject.

    I was never concerned enough to look into it, but I sure remember the FUD: "They are going to grow to the size of countries!" - "They are going to drink our oceans dry!" ... Like I said, unqualified people.

    Another factor is that there aren't that many supercomputers in the world, a handful of thousand of them.

    They never took off like the concerned feared. We don't even concern ourselves with their existence.

    Edit: grammar

    dustyData ,

    For what is worth, this time around it isn't unqualified people. There are strong scientifically studied concerns, not that infinite growth of LLMs, but their current numbers are already too power hungry. And what actual plans are currently in the engineering pipes are too much as well, not wild speculation, but actually funded and on the way development.

    shadearg ,
    @shadearg@lemmy.world avatar

    I am concerned about the energy abuse of LLMs, but it gets worse. AGI is right around the corner, and I fear that law of diminishing return may not apply due to advantages it will bring. We're in need of new, sustainable energy like nuclear now because it will not stop.

    Lettuceeatlettuce ,
    @Lettuceeatlettuce@lemmy.ml avatar

    The difference is that supercomputers by and large actually help humanity. They do things like help predict severe weather, help us understand mathematical problems, understand physics, develop new drug treatments, etc.

    They are also primarily owned and funded by universities, scientific institutions, and public funding.

    The modern push for ubiquitous corpo cloud platforms, SaaS, and AI training has resulted in massive pollution and environmental damage. For what? Mostly to generate massive profits for a small number of mega-corps, high level shareholders and ultra wealthy individuals, devalue and layoff workers, collect insane amounts of data to aid in mass surveillance and targeted advertising, and enshitify as much of the modern web as possible.

    All AI research should be open source, federated, and accountable to the public. It should also be handled mostly by educational institutions, not for-profit companies. There should be no part of it that is allowed to be closed source or proprietary. No government should honor any copyright claims or cyber law protecting companies' rights to not have their software hacked, decompiled, and code spread across the web for all to see and use as they see fit.

    shadearg ,
    @shadearg@lemmy.world avatar

    While I absolutely agree with everything you've stated, I'm not taking a moral position here. I'm just positing that the same arguments of concern have been on the table since the establishment of massive computational power regardless of how, or by whom, it was to be utilized.

    Lettuceeatlettuce ,
    @Lettuceeatlettuce@lemmy.ml avatar

    The concern is for value though. Like, if I'm going to use a massive amount of power and water to compute, I should be considering value to humanity as a whole.

    AI is being sold as that, but so far, it's actually harming instead of helping. Supercomputing was helping pretty much right away.

    I suppose you could argue that if general supercomputing was invented now, it would be used for just as superficial uses. Maybe the context of personal computing, the internet, and corpo interests shape that.

    nucleative ,

    I think we'll improve this a lot. Now it's a race to be first, later it will be a race to be profitable and keep costs low.

    Plus the sun outputs a lot more energy than earth can ever consume so we just need to get better at collecting it without creating waste on the side.

    frezik ,

    We're already going to have to deploy wind and solar at a breakneck pace to solve global warming. Why do we need a technology that would force us to install even more?

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