4 ms·

I might think to suggest that unchecked capitalist exploitation of our natural world has an awful lot to do with the inequities you brought into the discussion.

by cdata 2y ago

I might think to suggest that unchecked capitalist exploitation of our natural world has an awful lot to do with the inequities you brought into the discussion. And, if you grant me that this is possibly true (even if unconvincing or unprovable), surely you would agree that someone who believes such a thing would be prosocial and certainly not racist to scoff at the notion that somehow ever-more-unchecked-exploitation is the path to absolution.

brigadier132 2y ago
> capitalist exploitation Ah ok
fnordpiglet 2y ago
I don’t know how absolution figures into this or how providing an API for simulations of earths weather systems is some escalation of unchecked exploitation. In fact there was a HN headline article recently that extreme weather hurts the poorest nations because they lack the infrastructure to predict the weather well. Wouldn’t having such an API be of assistance? Is it possible that technology that’s three orders of magnitude more efficient (as they claim) be a boon to the poorest countries that are roughly three orders of magnitude less capable of affording advanced infrastructure like this? Or is grinding political ideology axes more important than actually making important things possible for the poorest countries?
- cdata 2y ago
  I wish I could agree, but the hard truth is that decisions that imply heavy amounts of energy consumption have to be able to sustain active critique. Simply waving the upsides around and shaming anyone who questions the cost is an age-old posture that has helped bring our society to the brink of disaster.
  - fnordpiglet 2y ago
    Consuming energy in itself isn’t problematic, what’s problematic is certain types of energy production are destructive. The question isn’t whether the use of energy itself is moral, it’s are they making moral choices with how they source their energy. That’s why clean and renewable energies are so important - there’s no reason to reduce energy consumption, there’s just reason to stop being destructive when producing energy.
    - cdata 2y ago
      I partially agree. It's actually both questions, because... - We don't have a 100% renewable energy regime (and we are very far from it) - Even if we did it would be possible (and likely) for bad actors to arbitrage cheap energy for yet-more-harmful use cases - As we grow the portion of grid demand that is served by green, renewable energy, the price of coal and natural gas is being driven down - Until we have 100% deployment, one company's "green" energy consumption will simply drive the less-well-capitalized to cheaper, not-green energy sources Cheaper, more pervasive energy will be used efficiently in the ways that are enabled by our legal framework. If we aren't critical of those usages, there is nothing to say that abuses won't become exponentially more conspicuous even as we adopt more and more "clean" energy. And in fact, that's what we see happening in the world today. Look no further than: - Bitcoin mines exploiting cheap spot power and demand response policies, and burning natural gas directly from the well because the speculative price of crypto is more appealing than selling the same gas on the market - Generative AI in general, but especially when you see hundreds of thousands of GPUs deployed without so much as a business case (Stability AI, Inflection, probably many others surfacing in the weeks to come)
- justinclift 2y ago
  > Wouldn’t having such an API be of assistance? It's probably going to come down to: 1. How accurate is it? and: 2: Are the people using it for things that it suits, vs things that it doesn't? For example, if it turns out to be decently accurate at predicting weather (say) "3 days from now" while being seriously wrong at timescales of 6 months, then only using for weather forecasts for the next few days seems good. But some people tend to believe anything an "AI" computer says regardless, so we'd need to make sure those kinds of people aren't getting it adopted where its harmful.
- heresWaldo 2y ago
  [flagged]

by cdata 2y ago

brigadier132 2y ago

> capitalist exploitation Ah ok

fnordpiglet 2y ago

I don’t know how absolution figures into this or how providing an API for simulations of earths weather systems is some escalation of unchecked exploitation. In fact there was a HN headline article recently that extreme weather hurts the poorest nations because they lack the infrastructure to predict the weather well. Wouldn’t having such an API be of assistance? Is it possible that technology that’s three orders of magnitude more efficient (as they claim) be a boon to the poorest countries that are roughly three orders of magnitude less capable of affording advanced infrastructure like this? Or is grinding political ideology axes more important than actually making important things possible for the poorest countries?

cdata 2y ago
I wish I could agree, but the hard truth is that decisions that imply heavy amounts of energy consumption have to be able to sustain active critique. Simply waving the upsides around and shaming anyone who questions the cost is an age-old posture that has helped bring our society to the brink of disaster.
- fnordpiglet 2y ago
  Consuming energy in itself isn’t problematic, what’s problematic is certain types of energy production are destructive. The question isn’t whether the use of energy itself is moral, it’s are they making moral choices with how they source their energy. That’s why clean and renewable energies are so important - there’s no reason to reduce energy consumption, there’s just reason to stop being destructive when producing energy.
  - cdata 2y ago
    I partially agree. It's actually both questions, because... - We don't have a 100% renewable energy regime (and we are very far from it) - Even if we did it would be possible (and likely) for bad actors to arbitrage cheap energy for yet-more-harmful use cases - As we grow the portion of grid demand that is served by green, renewable energy, the price of coal and natural gas is being driven down - Until we have 100% deployment, one company's "green" energy consumption will simply drive the less-well-capitalized to cheaper, not-green energy sources Cheaper, more pervasive energy will be used efficiently in the ways that are enabled by our legal framework. If we aren't critical of those usages, there is nothing to say that abuses won't become exponentially more conspicuous even as we adopt more and more "clean" energy. And in fact, that's what we see happening in the world today. Look no further than: - Bitcoin mines exploiting cheap spot power and demand response policies, and burning natural gas directly from the well because the speculative price of crypto is more appealing than selling the same gas on the market - Generative AI in general, but especially when you see hundreds of thousands of GPUs deployed without so much as a business case (Stability AI, Inflection, probably many others surfacing in the weeks to come)
justinclift 2y ago
> Wouldn’t having such an API be of assistance? It's probably going to come down to: 1. How accurate is it? and: 2: Are the people using it for things that it suits, vs things that it doesn't? For example, if it turns out to be decently accurate at predicting weather (say) "3 days from now" while being seriously wrong at timescales of 6 months, then only using for weather forecasts for the next few days seems good. But some people tend to believe anything an "AI" computer says regardless, so we'd need to make sure those kinds of people aren't getting it adopted where its harmful.
heresWaldo 2y ago
[flagged]