TechTakes

1490 readers

30 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

"The Obscene Energy Demands of A.I." - hackernews discussion (news.ycombinator.com)

submitted 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

36 comments fedilink hide all child comments

HN reacts to a New Yorker piece on the "obscene energy demands of AI" with exactly the same arguments coiners use when confronted with the energy cost of blockchain - the product is valuable in of itself, demands for more energy will spur investment in energy generation, and what about the energy costs of painting oil on canvas, hmmmmmm??????

Maybe it's just my newness antennae needing calibrating, but I do feel the extreme energy requirements for what's arguably just a frivolous toy is gonna cause AI boosters big problems, especially as energy demands ramp up in the US in the warmer months. Expect the narrative to adjust to counter it.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 13 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Exchange presented without comment:

My prediction: the advance of tech by AI will far surpasse what it consume in energy.

To look at the energy consumption of current model is extremely short sighted. If AI create a new material, a new solar cell, advance fusion reactor is all of humanity that jump forward.

Furthermore new generation of AI accelerators and new algorithms will improve efficiency by order of magnitute, it's still early days.

For every good thing, come up with a bad.

The material created will be a better poison/virus. The algorithm to keep the fusion tokamak from going boom will be at best 99% correct. The new solar cell? More exotic materials required than the current.

Blind optimism is a vice we cannot afford.

The post you're responding to doesn't argue from blind optimism, it argued a reasonably-expected gain in net beneficial effects.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Amazing how they just assume that this new future AI will actually work. Like there were not several AI winters.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

or that the existing AI works. Some of the worst social damage is from AI systems deployed in the wild that don't even do their fucking job properly in the first place, let alone doing it evilly. (Many deployments are both evil and incompetent.)

[–] [email protected] 9 points 9 months ago

Yeah and this damage keeps happening, see just how much damage faulty IT does when we could fully understand the code and processes behind it. For example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Post_Office_scandal (at least 4 suicides!). AI is only going to make it worse.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 9 months ago

Jesus fucking christ, if COLD FUSION is a REASONABLY EXPECTED GAIN then what on earth would an UNREASONABLE gain be? Infinite blowjobs? Quality discourse on HN?