576
submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by filister@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] magic_lobster_party@kbin.run 104 points 4 months ago

Bitcoin is estimated to consume 172 TWh, which is way more than Google and Microsoft combined.

https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption

[-] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Yes, bitcoin is trash. But most modern cryptos use far less energy. For example the second largest crypto ethereum uses almost no energy compared to bitcoin/AI..

"AI" can not say the same at all. And, unlike crypto, there's no realistic improvement in sight. It just keeps getting worse.

[-] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 7 points 4 months ago

PoS requires significant staker profits to work, which would create the same inequality as the dollar has. It's basically dollar bonds but without regulations.

[-] QuadratureSurfer@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

There's more to "AI" than just ChatGPT...

I think you're mixing up what AI actually means here, you would probably like this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGIpdiQrFDU

But in brief, what about DLSS? The ML models for that get improved with every driver update.

STT models like whisper that are great at transcribing/translating.

Object recognition models for drones to keep the camera centered on you and for object avoidance.

ML models for finding new cures.

Models in astronomy for finding planets... Etc.

You're trying to tell me that everything "AI" is trash and not getting better?

load more comments (10 replies)
[-] nightwatch_admin@feddit.nl 47 points 4 months ago

“While nuclear fusion seems like the perfect solution for AI's power needs due to its non-existent impact on the environment…”

nonexistent is key here.

[-] slaacaa@lemmy.world 13 points 4 months ago

Non-existent power source for a non-existent tech, a match made in heaven

(meaning what they hype as AI is actually mostly just LLM)

[-] BearOfaTime@lemm.ee 9 points 4 months ago

Well, it's definitely non-existant...

[-] bbuez@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Second law of thermodynamics would like to chime in, even with such a perfect nonexistent power source, waste heat is still an issue.. which you can radiate to space, which would take tremendous land use to facilitate...

Or we use that land and capital and effort for solar power, which exists and could power practically everything in our lives, minus AI. Sounds like a win to me.

(Also not to mention the necessity to fire up more fossils for this shit to compensate for the current lack of miracle power for their pipe dreams)

[-] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 3 points 4 months ago

"A drop in the bucket" would be an overstatement here.

[-] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 25 points 4 months ago

But we will soon have AGI, and then you can have your very own JARVIS! Don't you like Iron Man? Don't you like super heroes? Don't you like sci-fi? /s

[-] 0x0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 4 months ago

Wake me up when AI can simulate my brain. Literally, run me.exe and let me know.

[-] T156@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago

All fun and games until a moth ends up in your transistors.

[-] ICastFist@programming.dev 4 points 4 months ago

What if the moth is just their fursona?

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] merde@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 months ago
[-] Danitos@reddthat.com 2 points 4 months ago
[-] ghoscht@feddit.org 2 points 4 months ago

I believe it's Pi (1998). Absolutely crazy movie, you should watch the trailer: https://youtu.be/yRjkQT9xLZs

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] dan@upvote.au 21 points 4 months ago

and how much of that is energy that's essentially used to run other companies, by way of their cloud services? I imagine that'd be a pretty substantial amount.

[-] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 months ago

To be fair, that level of centralization in the hands of a for-profit corporation is worrisome too. They'll lure in small businesses and then enshittify.

[-] dan@upvote.au 7 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

They'll lure in small businesses and then enshittify.

I'm not so sure... These "cloud" services are paid services they make a lot of money from, and it's a huge industry with a very large number of competitors (practically all major hosting services, and even a lot of smaller ones).

[-] dutchkimble@lemy.lol 21 points 4 months ago

But people from those countries must also be using Google and Microsoft

[-] NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de 21 points 4 months ago

There might be some double counting, but it doesn't matter - this just illustrates the insane scale of these companies.

[-] FishFace@lemmy.world 9 points 4 months ago

Comparing huge multinational countries which serve every country to the half of countries with the smallest energy usage is not terribly illustrative.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] filister@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

Correction, the insane amount of energy the AI needs

[-] magic_lobster_party@kbin.run 17 points 4 months ago

Is all of this due to AI? I’m confident most of the energy is spent on other stuff, like data centers. Both Google and Microsoft are cloud providers.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] golli@lemm.ee 13 points 4 months ago

Not just people, but importantly also corporations running their services on Microsoft azure or Google cloud.

[-] Jako301@feddit.de 15 points 4 months ago

And both of these companies build and purchased more renewable energy sources than all 100+ countries combined. Microsoft has committed to be carbon free by 2030, and while I don't belive in their commitment, they at least seem to be trying contrary to most nations. They even invested in nuclear plants for their power needs.

You can fault both companies for a lot of different reasons, but in terms of carbon emissions due to power usage, they are better than 99.9% of the countries on that list.

[-] nightwatch_admin@feddit.nl 32 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

They didn’t build it. They buy from local suppliers, power that could have been used by people and companies already there. Now it’s just a lot more, while a serious part of the power consumption goes into debatable purposes like overhyped AI stuff.

Edit: and fwiw, recently Microsoft themselves announced that they are far from their reduction targets roadmap, so not sure where you got the happy flow news from

[-] oce@jlai.lu 14 points 4 months ago

Green energy that could go to higher priority sectors like decarborning housing, food production and transportation . Carbon free doesn't mean no ecological impact, of course it's better than fossil fuel, but it still a lot of ressources extracted and place taken over nature (which is the first cause of biodiversity loss). So ideally we should only destroy so much for essential needs.

[-] BearOfaTime@lemm.ee 4 points 4 months ago

Meh, it's all smoke and mirrors.

This is the "manufacture more to use fewer resources" nonsense of cash for clunkers.

[-] LodeMike@lemmy.today 15 points 4 months ago

No matter which way you correctly read the headline, it's false.

You can either read it as Google and microsoft individually consumed more electricity than these 100 countries did (false, it's Google and microsoft combined)

OR Google and Microsoft combined consimed more than these 100 countries did total.

Did an intern write this or something?

[-] VintageTech@sh.itjust.works 13 points 4 months ago

CoPilot with Gemini plugin did.

[-] LodeMike@lemmy.today 4 points 4 months ago

Hm. Maybe it's ambiguity is there to maximise clicking on the article?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] MonkderDritte@feddit.de 11 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

To be fair, Iceland only has around 400k inhabitants.

[-] muix@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 4 months ago

80% of our produced energy goes to aluminium smelting.

[-] MonkderDritte@feddit.de 2 points 4 months ago
[-] muix@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 4 months ago
[-] dropout@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago
[-] MonkderDritte@feddit.de 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Right, it was a bit over 100k km², memory is a bitch, corrected.

[-] maxinstuff@lemmy.world 9 points 4 months ago

Are we talking consumed for their own use? Or consumed as part of delivering cloud services to their customers?

These are very different things. The former would be horrifying the latter would be misleading in the extreme.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] nyan@lemmy.cafe 6 points 4 months ago

Many countries don't use a lot of electricity, especially those where the grids are spotty or in poor repair, or the overall population is small. Even without the AI garbage, I'd expect large tech-sector companies to use more energy than many countries.

(In other words, the headline for this was really poorly chosen. "Microsoft and Google pour more electricity into AI than 100+ countries use" might have gotten a bit closer to the actuall point, if it's actually true.)

[-] dan@upvote.au 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Microsoft and Google pour more electricity into AI than 100+ countries use" might have gotten a bit closer to the actuall point, if it's actually true

From what I can tell, the article is talking about total electrical use, not just AI.

Also probably ignoring the fact that some of their data centers have practically the entire roof covered in solar panels, Microsoft is investing in nuclear energy, etc.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 3 points 4 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Generative AI is taking the world by storm, and its impact is evident across all sectors, including medicine, education, music, computing, and more.

According to a detailed analysis by Michael Thomas, this surpasses the power consumption of over 100 nations, including Ghana, Tunisia, and more (via Tom's Hardware).

Some of the downsides to advancements in the AI landscape include the degradation of the environment, however, Google and Microsoft are big on renewable energy and have been championing the campaign while seeking alternative power sources.

Elon Musk claimed we're on the verge of the biggest technology breakthrough with AI, but there won't be enough power by 2025.

Sam Altman has been exploring a potential alternative power source for OpenAI's AI efforts, with nuclear fusion at the top of his list.

While nuclear fusion seems like the perfect solution for AI's power needs due to its non-existent impact on the environment, scientists and researchers say it's "too late to deal with the climate crisis" and view fission and renewable energy as better options.


The original article contains 449 words, the summary contains 169 words. Saved 62%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 17 Jul 2024
576 points (96.0% liked)

Technology

59648 readers
1487 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS