5 ms·

> they should be prioritized according to their benefit to society The fact that they have the capability to pay for and consume this power is the strongest si

> they should be prioritized according to their benefit to society The fact that they have the capability to pay for and consume this power is the strongest signal that they are indeed providing value to society. The money comes from somewhere. If that turns out not to be the case, they have the strongest incentive to stop. But this sort of rationing at the hands of some regulatory body has historically proven to be a far more deadly cure than whatever the presumptive disease was.

notatoad 2y ago
right, hospitals and farmers should just massively raise their prices so they can better compete with crypto miners, that will make the world better... money is not a good indicator of value provided to society. there is a ton of ways where it falls apart, and there are a lot of people devoted to finding the ways they can collect the most money while providing the least benefit to society.
- qeternity 2y ago
  > money is not a good indicator of value provided to society Ok, it's the least worst system we have...unless you have an alternative. I'm all ears.
  - brookst 2y ago
    Usually these things end up with “well obviously my personal priorities are objectively true…”
    - qeternity 2y ago
      Yes but the aggregate of every individual's personal priorities are by definition society's priorities...
      - ok_dad 2y ago
        What do you get when 10% of Americans get to decide 67% of the priorities?
        paulryanrogers 2y ago
        Handmaid's Tale?
        doublepg23 2y ago
        Socialism?
        ok_dad 2y ago
        How would you even come to that conclusion???
      - consteval 2y ago
        This only hold true in relation to the economy if you say every person has the exact same wealth. This isn't true in capitalism and is (arguably) the reason capitalism exists. Such a system, however you choose to develop it, would invariably be closer to socialism in spirit.
  - vundercind 2y ago
    Spotting and stopping the odd case where it’s gone haywire doesn’t mean ditching market pricing across the board. You can just fix (maybe even only temporarily!) the part that’s doing wacky, undesirable stuff.
    - notatoad 2y ago
      yeah, a little bit of reason goes a long way. we don't need to invent a whole new economic system. we can just say "this is bad, and we should do less of it". and making sure that power goes to people's homes before it goes to datacentres is one of those things. and the best part is that's the way the world already works, so nothing even needs to change.
  - consteval 2y ago
    The problem with these conversations is that capitalists seem incredibly brittle-minded. Meaning even a small, and fair, critic devolves into "oh so you want communism?" Public vs private isn't black and white, it's a spectrum. Energy providers sit on this spectrum. In some way, they're public infrastructure. In others, they're private companies. Slightly pushing them more towards "public" via regulation is what we HAVE been doing for a long time. This shouldn't be setting off your communism senses. If it is, you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how the economy works in regard to these kind-of-public-infrastructure goods and services.
- kortilla 2y ago
  If power prices go up, it incentivizes building more generation, which is better for everyone. Capping prices and participants is pure stupidity. Price controls and rations never work
jltsiren 2y ago
That argument would require regular socialization and redistribution of all wealth. The market does not prioritize what the society needs, because individual needs are weighted by wealth and income. In a Western society, everyone's needs are supposed to be equally important. We often don't even make majority decisions, because we assume that the constitutional rights of a minority are more important than what the majority finds reasonable.
- qeternity 2y ago
  > The market does not prioritize what the society needs What do you think prices do? What do you think income is reflective of? Companies that make lots of money provide things that lots of people are willing to pay for. This is the reflection of what people need. Exxon makes money because people want to stay warm. Cargill makes money because people want to eat. Apple makes money because people want to be entertained. Eli Lilly makes money because people don't want to die. What do you know that millions of people all acting in their own self interest don't know?
  - kelseyfrog 2y ago
    Parent is saying that people with more money can affect the price signal more. That simply isn't as fair as weighting individuals equally. A lot of people don't like the economic impacts of this, so they tend to justify it rather than accept it as valid criticism.
    - qeternity 2y ago
      > That simply isn't as fair as weighting individuals equally. It isn't meant to be fair. Fairness blunts the signal.
      - kelseyfrog 2y ago
        Too bad. I mean it to be fair
  - jltsiren 2y ago
weard_beard 2y ago
AI Overview: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has many accomplishments, including: Reducing air pollution The EPA has reduced air pollution by regulating auto emissions, banning pesticides, and cracking down on factory and power plant emissions. New cars are now 99% cleaner than 1970 models, and the EPA's efforts have led to a decrease in smog and asthma cases. Cleaning up toxic waste The EPA has cleaned up toxic waste through the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (Superfund), which provides funding for cleaning up abandoned waste dumps. Protecting the ozone layer The EPA has protected the ozone layer by reauthorizing the Clean Air Act in 1990 to phase out chemicals that deplete it. Increasing recycling The EPA has increased recycling. Revitalizing brownfields The EPA has revitalized brownfields, which has led to increased property values, reduced impervious surface expansion, and reduced residential VMT. Reducing water use The EPA's WaterSense program has helped Americans save water, with a cumulative savings of 8.7 trillion gallons as of the end of 2023. Banning cancer-causing pesticides The EPA has banned or restricted many cancer-causing pesticides, including heptachlor, chlordane, EDB, daminozide, and chlorpyrifos. Testing schools for asbestos The EPA required all primary and secondary schools to be tested for asbestos starting in 1982. Rating energy efficiency of appliances The EPA introduced the Energy Star program in 1992 to rate the energy efficiency of household appliances. EPA History: Documents about Agency Accomplishments | US EPA Nov 17, 2023 Generative AI is experimental.
quantified 2y ago
It's providing value to whoever is spending the money. Right now, that's "investors". We'll see about society. If it provides that much benefit to "society", what is the activity that benefits? It's not just going to be people knowing things, there is a finite limit to what people care about. If the outputs from AI drive increased economic activity, that'll be reflected as increaded energy usage. Which will likely dwarf the AI's usage.
abenga 2y ago
> The money comes from somewhere. Gullible investors for now.

notatoad 2y ago

right, hospitals and farmers should just massively raise their prices so they can better compete with crypto miners, that will make the world better... money is not a good indicator of value provided to society. there is a ton of ways where it falls apart, and there are a lot of people devoted to finding the ways they can collect the most money while providing the least benefit to society.

qeternity 2y ago
> money is not a good indicator of value provided to society Ok, it's the least worst system we have...unless you have an alternative. I'm all ears.
- brookst 2y ago
  Usually these things end up with “well obviously my personal priorities are objectively true…”
  - qeternity 2y ago
    Yes but the aggregate of every individual's personal priorities are by definition society's priorities...
    - ok_dad 2y ago
      What do you get when 10% of Americans get to decide 67% of the priorities?
      - paulryanrogers 2y ago
        Handmaid's Tale?
      - doublepg23 2y ago
        Socialism?
        ok_dad 2y ago
        How would you even come to that conclusion???
    - consteval 2y ago
      This only hold true in relation to the economy if you say every person has the exact same wealth. This isn't true in capitalism and is (arguably) the reason capitalism exists. Such a system, however you choose to develop it, would invariably be closer to socialism in spirit.
- vundercind 2y ago
  Spotting and stopping the odd case where it’s gone haywire doesn’t mean ditching market pricing across the board. You can just fix (maybe even only temporarily!) the part that’s doing wacky, undesirable stuff.
  - notatoad 2y ago
    yeah, a little bit of reason goes a long way. we don't need to invent a whole new economic system. we can just say "this is bad, and we should do less of it". and making sure that power goes to people's homes before it goes to datacentres is one of those things. and the best part is that's the way the world already works, so nothing even needs to change.
- consteval 2y ago
  The problem with these conversations is that capitalists seem incredibly brittle-minded. Meaning even a small, and fair, critic devolves into "oh so you want communism?" Public vs private isn't black and white, it's a spectrum. Energy providers sit on this spectrum. In some way, they're public infrastructure. In others, they're private companies. Slightly pushing them more towards "public" via regulation is what we HAVE been doing for a long time. This shouldn't be setting off your communism senses. If it is, you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how the economy works in regard to these kind-of-public-infrastructure goods and services.
kortilla 2y ago
If power prices go up, it incentivizes building more generation, which is better for everyone. Capping prices and participants is pure stupidity. Price controls and rations never work

jltsiren 2y ago

That argument would require regular socialization and redistribution of all wealth. The market does not prioritize what the society needs, because individual needs are weighted by wealth and income. In a Western society, everyone's needs are supposed to be equally important. We often don't even make majority decisions, because we assume that the constitutional rights of a minority are more important than what the majority finds reasonable.

qeternity 2y ago
> The market does not prioritize what the society needs What do you think prices do? What do you think income is reflective of? Companies that make lots of money provide things that lots of people are willing to pay for. This is the reflection of what people need. Exxon makes money because people want to stay warm. Cargill makes money because people want to eat. Apple makes money because people want to be entertained. Eli Lilly makes money because people don't want to die. What do you know that millions of people all acting in their own self interest don't know?
- kelseyfrog 2y ago
  Parent is saying that people with more money can affect the price signal more. That simply isn't as fair as weighting individuals equally. A lot of people don't like the economic impacts of this, so they tend to justify it rather than accept it as valid criticism.
  - qeternity 2y ago
    > That simply isn't as fair as weighting individuals equally. It isn't meant to be fair. Fairness blunts the signal.
    - kelseyfrog 2y ago
      Too bad. I mean it to be fair
- jltsiren 2y ago

weard_beard 2y ago

AI Overview: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has many accomplishments, including: Reducing air pollution The EPA has reduced air pollution by regulating auto emissions, banning pesticides, and cracking down on factory and power plant emissions. New cars are now 99% cleaner than 1970 models, and the EPA's efforts have led to a decrease in smog and asthma cases. Cleaning up toxic waste The EPA has cleaned up toxic waste through the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (Superfund), which provides funding for cleaning up abandoned waste dumps. Protecting the ozone layer The EPA has protected the ozone layer by reauthorizing the Clean Air Act in 1990 to phase out chemicals that deplete it. Increasing recycling The EPA has increased recycling. Revitalizing brownfields The EPA has revitalized brownfields, which has led to increased property values, reduced impervious surface expansion, and reduced residential VMT. Reducing water use The EPA's WaterSense program has helped Americans save water, with a cumulative savings of 8.7 trillion gallons as of the end of 2023. Banning cancer-causing pesticides The EPA has banned or restricted many cancer-causing pesticides, including heptachlor, chlordane, EDB, daminozide, and chlorpyrifos. Testing schools for asbestos The EPA required all primary and secondary schools to be tested for asbestos starting in 1982. Rating energy efficiency of appliances The EPA introduced the Energy Star program in 1992 to rate the energy efficiency of household appliances. EPA History: Documents about Agency Accomplishments | US EPA Nov 17, 2023 Generative AI is experimental.

quantified 2y ago

It's providing value to whoever is spending the money. Right now, that's "investors". We'll see about society. If it provides that much benefit to "society", what is the activity that benefits? It's not just going to be people knowing things, there is a finite limit to what people care about. If the outputs from AI drive increased economic activity, that'll be reflected as increaded energy usage. Which will likely dwarf the AI's usage.

abenga 2y ago

> The money comes from somewhere. Gullible investors for now.