• aramis87@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    [he] addressed the “immense” energy needs of AI, acknowledging that the intensive energy requirements of expanding AI ventures have caused slippage on Alphabet’s climate targets. However, Pichai insisted that the company still wants to achieve net zero by 2030 through investments in new energy technologies. “The rate at which we were hoping to make progress will be impacted,” Pichai said, warning that constraining an economy based on energy “will have consequences.”

    We need “line go up” so badly, we’re willing to bake the planet.

    “We will have to work through societal disruptions,” he said, adding that the technology would “create new opportunities” and “evolve and transition certain jobs.”

    Someone once described AI as “a way for the wealthy to access the benefits of the skilled, without allowing the skilled to access the benefits of wealth”.

    • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      31 minutes ago

      Any economy or technology that can’t work within energy constraints doesn’t deserve to exist. For fuck’s sake, even Bitcoin adjusts difficulty down during its frequent crashes.

    • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      or since there are FOSS AI models that are free as in free beer it allows everyone to access the benefits of the privileged - i.e. those who can specialized in fields like arts that aren’t conducive to making enough money out of the gate to survive as a working class person

      • MrSmith@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        “Privileged” lol.

        If you couldn’t make a poem before “AI”, you still can’t make a poem now.

        • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 hours ago

          Do you have another retort besides “lol”? Spending the amount of time required to produce professional art when an income isn’t directly guaranteed is a risk most of us can’t take, FYI.

          You still can’t make

          Yeah and why would I need to?

          If I don’t enjoy that particular process nearly enough to learn how to make it good, and I wanted it to be good and I was feeling creative and had an idea for it, I could just get it made for me, free of charge, free of corpo influence or any strings attached. It’s a sweet deal.

          • MrSmith@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            2 hours ago

            Spending the amount of time required to produce professional art when an income isn’t directly guaranteed is a risk most of us can’t take, FYI.

            Because you don’t care about making art, so you choose comfort and financial safety. It has nothing to do with “Privilege”.

            You’re talking about outsourcing art, but then complain about who actually make art.

            Art isn’t output/result. That’s exactly what you’re getting from your gen slop.

    • hummingbird@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Oh the great technology god will help us. We will have so much reduction, you cannot imagine! We have no idea how but surely throwing money at it will get things done. Trust us!