3 ms·

While this is better than loading up a coal power plant, the way I see it, it's still a tragic situation. Even if AI used purely fossil-free electricity (which

by lopis 2y ago

While this is better than loading up a coal power plant, the way I see it, it's still a tragic situation. Even if AI used purely fossil-free electricity (which it doesn't), it's still putting pressure on our grids and energy production. The green energy AI consumes if the green energy some other less lucrative industry will not consume. Big tech is currently scraping their net neutrality plans left and right...

unglaublich 2y ago
Yeah, that's how economies work? If someone offers more for a resource, they get it. More incentive to build better grids.
throwaway48540 2y ago
What exactly is the problem? That they're using any energy at all? Well, I don't like that people have lights on after 7 PM...
- CaptainFever 2y ago
  Yeah. The only way the sentiment "I don't like that ___ is using energy, even though the energy is completely clean" makes sense is if they've already made up their minds that ___ is bad, and thus any energy usage is bad. The energy usage argument is a red herring; it's actually just a value judgment on AI itself. > If you're an AI hater, it's frustrating to see what you consider a useless technology growing to take up more and more of our energy mix, eating into climate gains being made from the immense growth of renewable energy. If you're an AI maximalist, on the other hand, the significant energy use projected for AI is a small price to pay for a technology that you think will revolutionize our lives much more than technologies like air conditioning, refrigeration, or the automobile ever did. > The answer probably lies somewhere in the middle. In the long run, AI's energy use will likely level off at a significant but not grid-melting level that's roughly commensurate with the collective economic value we as a society get from it. Whether the trade-offs inherent in that shift are "worth it" involves a lot of value judgements that go well beyond how much electricity a bunch of servers are using. Source: https://arstechnica.com/ai/2024/06/is-generative-ai-really-going-to-wreak-havoc-on-the-power-grid/ https://arstechnica.com/ai/2024/06/is-generative-ai-really-g...

by lopis 2y ago

unglaublich 2y ago

Yeah, that's how economies work? If someone offers more for a resource, they get it. More incentive to build better grids.

throwaway48540 2y ago

What exactly is the problem? That they're using any energy at all? Well, I don't like that people have lights on after 7 PM...

CaptainFever 2y ago
Yeah. The only way the sentiment "I don't like that ___ is using energy, even though the energy is completely clean" makes sense is if they've already made up their minds that ___ is bad, and thus any energy usage is bad. The energy usage argument is a red herring; it's actually just a value judgment on AI itself. > If you're an AI hater, it's frustrating to see what you consider a useless technology growing to take up more and more of our energy mix, eating into climate gains being made from the immense growth of renewable energy. If you're an AI maximalist, on the other hand, the significant energy use projected for AI is a small price to pay for a technology that you think will revolutionize our lives much more than technologies like air conditioning, refrigeration, or the automobile ever did. > The answer probably lies somewhere in the middle. In the long run, AI's energy use will likely level off at a significant but not grid-melting level that's roughly commensurate with the collective economic value we as a society get from it. Whether the trade-offs inherent in that shift are "worth it" involves a lot of value judgements that go well beyond how much electricity a bunch of servers are using. Source: https://arstechnica.com/ai/2024/06/is-generative-ai-really-going-to-wreak-havoc-on-the-power-grid/ https://arstechnica.com/ai/2024/06/is-generative-ai-really-g...