242
submitted 7 months ago by flango@lemmy.eco.br to c/news@lemmy.world

one assessment suggests that ChatGPT, the chatbot created by OpenAI in San Francisco, California, is already consuming the energy of 33,000 homes. It’s estimated that a search driven by generative AI uses four to five times the energy of a conventional web search. Within years, large AI systems are likely to need as much energy as entire nations.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

Yes, again, I have heard the "we shouldn't do anything about an ecological disaster because something else will come along that will be bad too" argument before. It doesn't wash.

This is about you hate AI

Please demonstrate that to be true. Unless it's a lie. Is it a lie?

[-] FaceDeer@kbin.social 0 points 7 months ago

Last week you were advocating in favor of mobs burning self-driving cars if they were "pissed off" by them. You banned AI-generated art from the @tenforward community you mod. You seem pretty firmly anti-AI to me.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago

Last week you were advocating in favor of mobs burning self-driving cars if they were “pissed off” by them.

That is a scurrilous misrepresentation of what I said I said and has nothing to do with AI. Irrelevant and ironic for someone who criticized me for making personal attacks.

You banned AI-generated art from the @tenforward community you mod.

I am not the only mod. It was a group decision because AI in that specific community is both lazy and, more importantly, gets Star Trek wrong virtually every time.

So neither of those things are evidence and one is essentially both a personal attack and a lie. Come to think of it, both of them are essentially lies since you made it sound like the banning was a unilateral decision rather than a decision reached after a lot of discussion between a team of moderators.

But hey, do as you say, not as you do, right?

[-] FaceDeer@kbin.social 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

That is a scurrilous misrepresentation of what I said I said and has nothing to do with AI. Irrelevant and ironic for someone who criticized me for making personal attacks.

You... you literally asked for this. Your previous commented ended with "Please demonstrate that to be true." You asked for it to be demonstrated, so I demonstrated, and now you're angry that I did so.

The thread was here if anyone wants to look at the full context. Archive.is link.

But hey, do as you say, not as you do, right?

I'm rapidly losing track. Are you now against bringing up what people do in other threads and communities when you argue with them?

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago

Ah, you mean the thread where I explicitly said they were a PUBLIC MENACE and not just because people were pissed off? As you can see right in your link?

And just like this time, you were making personal attacks by lying about what I said to make me look bad. Except this time you did it in a really silly way.

[-] MagicShel@programming.dev 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Is it a lie? That's just what I infer from you being completely dismissive that AI could be worth it, or that a cleaner power source could be found, or that the same silicon dedicated to another purpose would be just as damaging to the environment.

And look, it's fine to hate AI if you do, but that makes this whole conversation about wasting water pointless if solving the problem through either better technology or perhaps proving it's a more efficient use of water if it accomplishes enough work. Why would anyone put any effort into addressing those issues if they aren't what really bothers you about AI? I could've done something more productive with my time.

And none of this is personal, by the way. We don't see eye to eye on AI, but I agree with probably 90% of what you post and disagreeing here doesn't make me respect you any less as a person. I haven't downvoted anything you've said. But if we're going to discuss the issue I'd like it to be fruitful which isn't possible if aren't discussing the actual issue.

And if we are, then why so dismissive about solving the energy issue more broadly in a way that actually saves water regardless of what those compute cycles are spent on? Because the trend is that energy usage will continue to rise regardless of AI, so what you are arguing you want isn't going to achieve the outcome you desire. So instead of a pointless gesture, let's find an actual solution because it isn't actually AI that's to blame here.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world -1 points 7 months ago

Is it a lie?

Yes it is.

And none of this is personal, by the way.

Apart from when you decided to lie about me instead of asking what I thought.

I'd call this pretty damn personal-

This isn’t about the energy or water. This is about you hate AI and any angle you can find to attack it is good. Seems disingenuous to me. But also a waste of time because you don’t actually want to hear energy solutions, you just want to stop AI.

And also a lie.

Let's see if you will admit that it was both a personal attack and a lie.

I don't hold out much hope.

this post was submitted on 20 Feb 2024
242 points (95.1% liked)

News

22907 readers
3986 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS