167
Bill Gates says not to worry about AI's energy draw
(www.theregister.com)
This screams FAITH (Filthy Assumptions Instead of THinking) from a distance, on multiple levels:
- Assuming that the current machine learning development will lead to artificial general intelligence. Will it?
- Assuming that said AGI would appear in time to reduce power consumption. Will it?
- Assuming that lowering the future power consumption will be enough to address issues caused by the current power consumption. Will it?
- Assuming that addressing issues from a distant future means that the whole process won't cause harm for people in a nearer future. Will it?
Furthermore, Gates in the quote is being disingenuous:
"Let's not go overboard on this," he said. "Datacenters are, in the most extreme case, a 6 percent addition [to the energy load] but probably only 2 to 2.5 percent. The question is, will AI accelerate a more than 6 percent reduction? And the answer is: certainly," Gates said.
The answer addresses something far, far more specific than the main issue.
If I may, here's my alternative solution for the problem, in the same style as Gates':
Kill everyone between the North Pole and the Equator.
What do you mean, it would kill 85% people in the world? Well, you can't make an omelet without breaking some eggs, right? Nobody that I know personally lives there, so Not My Problem®. (Just keep Japan, I need my anime to watch.)
...I'm being clearly sarcastic to deliver a point here - it's trivially easy to underestimate issues affecting humankind, and problems associated with their solutions, if you are not directly affected by either. Gates is some billionaire bubbled around rich people; this sort of problem will affect the poor first, as the rich can simply throw enough money into their problems to make them go away.
