• Lembot_0005 ( Lembot_0005@lemy.lol ) 
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        IP theft

        People learn in the same way

        the waste of water, waste of energy,

        People consume that too. Even while not working.

        dumb down all future generations

        Human specialists also let other people stop being specialists. When did specialisation become the norm? In the early paleolith? Earlier?

        • stoy ( stoy@lemmy.zip ) 
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          11 months ago

          People consume that too. Even while not working.

          That is correct, but you completely miss the scales, not to mention the lack of learning when the AI makes a mistake.

          When a human makes a mistake, they can learn from it, understand what went wrong and improve, when an AI makes a mistake it is just being told “bad”, it is really difficult to define why you rejected a specific response.

          So not only does AI use more energy, far more is wasted

            • stoy ( stoy@lemmy.zip ) 
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              11 months ago
              1. We are talking about to vastly different entities, to even consider that they would be equal in terms of energy use for a similar task is dumb. That would be like expecting the energy use for transporting box by truck or by ship to be equal. That just doesn’t work.
              2. The results are not even comparable.
              • jaybone ( jaybone@lemmy.zip ) 
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                Just to play devils advocate, how much energy goes into growing our food, processing our food, transporting our food. Our education, and entertainment. All of which go into the output we produce. I wondering if at that point the numbers get closer.

                When talking about these data centers, they often use the term enough to power a “small city.” So how much output could a “small city” of people produce? You’d have to break the result down into required man hours, and spread that across the population, as obviously the AI will do things faster than individual humans.

          • jaybone ( jaybone@lemmy.zip ) 
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Getting off topic but these comments have me wondering, how much fresh water do we actually use to survive? Obviously we consume water to drink. And use it in our kitchens and bathrooms. But we know that’s just a small percentage of water use. The largest use is agriculture. I’ll count that as our consumption as well, because we eat the food produced. But I wonder what percentage of overall use goes to things that do not directly contribute to our survival. Like landscaping e.g. watering lawns. Especially in desert areas. Golf courses, that sort of thing.

        • Auli ( Auli@lemmy.ca ) 
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          What a bunch of Bullshit no we don’t learn the same way as we don’t have perfect recall. And we do not consume the amount of energy AI data centers do. They consume a cities worth or more of energy to make a select few rich. Whatever we are done as a species it was a good run. All this fucking consumerism and must have infinite growth on a finite planet. We are to stupid to realize we are dead.

          • xthexder ( xthexder@l.sw0.com ) 
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Ironically AI doesn’t have perfectly recall either, and that’s kind of one of the main problems with it and hallucinations. It can easily get poisoned by a handful of data points in it’s training set. But even then, it can only really blend 2 data points together, it’s got no ability to extrapolate and think outside the box.

    • Ech ( ech@lemmy.ca ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      11 months ago

      Along with the other comment, it’s also soulless. Not that the postal series had much in the way of artistry to begin with, even that series is still more artistic than anything generated by a program.

    • november ( november@piefed.blahaj.zone ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      I do not believe that you think results are the only thing that matter, methods be damned. I think you do have a line you would draw somewhere. The rest of us simply draw ours in a different place than you do.