Hacker News Reader

Comment by infecto | Hacker News Reader

Not definite at all. That is only your world view.

Seems like a pretty worldview to say generating garbage text and 5 legged horse images isn't worth a measurable amount of our electricity, especially in a time where we so clearly need to be reducing consumption.

Generative AI may seem frivolous on the surface, but it's fundamental research, you might as well be against materials science research. People are already using AI models to create more efficient energy systems, batteries, solar panels, etc.

This is fundamental research and if you kill research because you think it's frivolous you will kill many things you didn't know you wanted. Frivolous research is the backbone of scientific progress.

Even generative AI - it may be called generative AI because that's flashy, but its real power is as classifiers, and classifiers are incredibly useful.

Imagine robots that could perfectly sort recycling/garbage/compost, what do you think that is worth?

Imagine robots that can mechanically remove weeds so that zero herbicides are needed, what do you think that is worth?

The possibilities really are endless and I am excited to see how these technologies evolve.

But this isn't only what AI does.

AI can also aid in optimizing energy grids that adapts to supply and demand [1], aid farmers in optimizing fertilizer and water use [2], logistics companies to optimize routes and fuel use [3], etc.

It's not at all only about the consumer-facing products and these are areas often in need of urgent attention and optimization to boot.

[1] https://www.iea.org/commentaries/why-ai-and-energy-are-the-n...

[2] https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3587716.3587742

[3] https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/climate-energy/logist...

Perhaps your own view but obviously not everyone's. I am not a doomer and don't live in the same doomer vision as your own, sorry. I am excited for the future and part of that future is growing energy consumption which will fuel new innovations.

What will fuel the growing energy consumption? Not fossil fuels.

Sam Altman says we need to invent nuclear fusion to meet the AI power consumption.

Did anyone stop to think maybe reducing power usage is a better solution than a moon shot invention?

I am not a doomer. Fossil fuels may run out but innovation will continue. Nobody knows what the future holds but I sit on the positive lens that the human race will figure this out. That might not work out but until there is conclusive evidence, I will keep my head up.

Innovations have led us to global warming. It’s not a given that innovation necessary leads to overall positive outcomes.

All paths lead to the heat death of the universe. How do you want to live between now and then?

The GP is saying things will invariably get better because innovation. I’m saying that this is non-sequitur. It depends on the specific innovations whether things get better or worse.

I am simply saying over the long time scale things have been improving for the human race. I don’t care about specific innovations, that is pedantic and illogical. Your only point is global warming which regardless, humans are better off now than they were historically. We definitely need to be concerned about balance of life but I am not going to go hide in a hole and be scared. If you want that, go live on a self sufficient farm. Such a silly thread over electricity use for AI.

I am not a doomer. I don't know what the future will hold but I do know that there is less suffering in the world and the world in general is becomming a better place, that seems pretty positive to me.

You are not a doomer because you repeat that like a protective mantra and don't think about the nasty implications of "what if I'm wrong" because they put negative energy in your chakras, right?

Why not simply wait for the technology to mature before expending so many resources on it?

I will respond to your absurd question with an equally absurd question. Why not go live on a compound where you collect your own resources to survive?

How is it absurd to simply not widely deploy an immature technology?

maybe it is time to require AI companies to run (and self-insure) dedicated nuke powerplants

Your hyperbolic anecdotes are already dated.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com