3 ms·

> Electricity sources and CO2 emissions I love that they included this in their consideration and pointed out the impact running these GPUs has on the environm

> Electricity sources and CO2 emissions I love that they included this in their consideration and pointed out the impact running these GPUs has on the environment.

storyinmemo 2y ago
Shameless employer promotion here while I work on H100 clusters today: https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/crusoe-puts-cpus-into-at-north-data-center-in-iceland/ https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/crusoe-puts-cpus-..., https://crusoe.ai/cloud/ https://crusoe.ai/cloud/ Iceland seems to have an excess of energy to population and it's very green.
- barbazoo 2y ago
  I applaud the vision, I wish you folks hired remote software devs
  - irq 2y ago
    Crusoe is unabashedly anti-remote work, which is curious considering their company’s environmental and energy locality focus. I interviewed with them, they are very much an old school “you must all work physically in San Francisco” company. I work for one of their competitors now, one that embraces remote work.
    - tucnak 2y ago
      I'm sure they don't even realise What and Whom they have lost. You've taught them a lesson!!
- ai4ever 2y ago
  so, ex bitcoin miners are pivoting into gpu clouds whats the point ?
123yawaworht456 2y ago
it has fuck all any impact if the electricity is sourced from nuclear/hydro/solar/wind/geothermal.
- barbazoo 2y ago
  Well, exactly, that's their point. If possible, choose a data center location with access to renewable energy.
  - joe_the_user 2y ago
    The idea that consumer choice can change total carbon output is so absurd that it's better to boycott anything claiming some special source. Yes, the present CO2 output is a planet wide-catastrophe. No, your little "contribution" can't change that - if you don't buy cheap coal energy, someone will, etc. Strong state regulation forcing a decrease in total CO2 output with no exceptions is the only force that could save us in the near term (and I'm not holding my breath here but I had to say that). All your "market" and "choice" solutions are burning up like the California vegetation.
    - barbazoo 2y ago
      Wouldn't that be great, we wouldn't have to feel bad about destroying the planet anymore :) I don't think it's true though. Do you have any evidence that consumer choice does not have any impact on carbon emissions? In other areas it definitely does [1] > if you don't buy cheap coal energy, someone will No, not if everyone starts asking for clean energy instead. There isn't an infinite number of people, at some point demand for clean energy will make it unattractive to offer dirty energy. [1] https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2020/12/16/buying-stuff-drives-climate-change/ https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2020/12/16/buying-stuff-dr...
      - abdullahkhalids 2y ago
        Generally, globally sub-optimal many-agent game-theoretic equilibria can't be escaped by individual agents shooting themselves in the foot. There is a reason why it is an equilibrium in the first place. If there a traffic jam every day that adds 30 min to everyone's drive, you can't solve it by asking some people to voluntarily take the alternate path that adds 1 hour to their drive. The correct way to move from the sub-optimal equilibrium to a better one is via global action i.e. changing the rules of the game. In the real world that means state level actions as GP talks about.

> Electricity sources and CO2 emissions I love that they included this in their consideration and pointed out the impact running these GPUs has on the environment.

storyinmemo 2y ago

Shameless employer promotion here while I work on H100 clusters today: https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/crusoe-puts-cpus-into-at-north-data-center-in-iceland/ https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/crusoe-puts-cpus-..., https://crusoe.ai/cloud/ https://crusoe.ai/cloud/ Iceland seems to have an excess of energy to population and it's very green.

barbazoo 2y ago
I applaud the vision, I wish you folks hired remote software devs
- irq 2y ago
  Crusoe is unabashedly anti-remote work, which is curious considering their company’s environmental and energy locality focus. I interviewed with them, they are very much an old school “you must all work physically in San Francisco” company. I work for one of their competitors now, one that embraces remote work.
  - tucnak 2y ago
    I'm sure they don't even realise What and Whom they have lost. You've taught them a lesson!!
ai4ever 2y ago
so, ex bitcoin miners are pivoting into gpu clouds whats the point ?

123yawaworht456 2y ago

it has fuck all any impact if the electricity is sourced from nuclear/hydro/solar/wind/geothermal.

barbazoo 2y ago
Well, exactly, that's their point. If possible, choose a data center location with access to renewable energy.
- joe_the_user 2y ago
  The idea that consumer choice can change total carbon output is so absurd that it's better to boycott anything claiming some special source. Yes, the present CO2 output is a planet wide-catastrophe. No, your little "contribution" can't change that - if you don't buy cheap coal energy, someone will, etc. Strong state regulation forcing a decrease in total CO2 output with no exceptions is the only force that could save us in the near term (and I'm not holding my breath here but I had to say that). All your "market" and "choice" solutions are burning up like the California vegetation.
  - barbazoo 2y ago
    Wouldn't that be great, we wouldn't have to feel bad about destroying the planet anymore :) I don't think it's true though. Do you have any evidence that consumer choice does not have any impact on carbon emissions? In other areas it definitely does [1] > if you don't buy cheap coal energy, someone will No, not if everyone starts asking for clean energy instead. There isn't an infinite number of people, at some point demand for clean energy will make it unattractive to offer dirty energy. [1] https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2020/12/16/buying-stuff-drives-climate-change/ https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2020/12/16/buying-stuff-dr...
    - abdullahkhalids 2y ago
      Generally, globally sub-optimal many-agent game-theoretic equilibria can't be escaped by individual agents shooting themselves in the foot. There is a reason why it is an equilibrium in the first place. If there a traffic jam every day that adds 30 min to everyone's drive, you can't solve it by asking some people to voluntarily take the alternate path that adds 1 hour to their drive. The correct way to move from the sub-optimal equilibrium to a better one is via global action i.e. changing the rules of the game. In the real world that means state level actions as GP talks about.