AlbedoORourke

I'm going to ignore the sort of hostile tone you're taking with me for the sake of an earnest discussion.

But yeah, to get more specific... for example, we could try to advocate for a law that companies like X and Facebook that have consumer-facing image generation to at least fund it with renewables as opposed to just burning natural gas generators. A blanket law that new data centers can only use nuclear or renewables period, regardless of application. I know you'll just say that's "lib-shit" but what do you want me to do say we should start kidnapping politicians or something? It's hard to target this stuff since you can do it at home on a gaming GPU, so I think going after larger providers like social media companies makes sense.

Also energy usage HAS gone down significantly for a lot of these inference requests since some of the original findings. We're finding out that a mixture of experts (small models trained on specific tasks that can be routed to by a top level model that specializes in routing) can rival the output of previously very expensive foundational models for a fraction of the cost. There's new hardware coming out that makes the matrix math more performant and I think it's not unreasonable to say we should put public funds behind such research for the sake of the planet.

And I'm not just saying "it sucks now". That's my whole point... it's more nuanced than that. You're seeing a lot of the most wasteful applications of it on social media because you're not seeing how individuals and businesses aren't necessarily publishing their workflows that use this tech.

To give an example, video generation, something we didn't have even two years ago worth a shit, is getting better every week. If you're a filmmaker and you're in the field filming something, but realize you need a few seconds of establishing shot, or maybe you notice a continuity fuckup or something, you'd normally have to go back on site and reshoot more footage. That includes getting a crew into one or more vehicles, driving somewhere, and using probably lots more fossil fuels. With transformer based video tech, you can use generative fill or just generate a transition or clothing change for those few seconds and save loads of time and money. It's not all black and white is all I'm saying.

disengage

yeah, I'm gonna just drop "disengage" again and next time maybe just don't reply to my comments please?

What I'm advocating for is a more nuanced conversation that goes beyond the binary of "it's all bad" vs. "it's all good." Expressing frustration and concerns is absolutely valid.

Honestly, it's fascinating how committed you are to misinterpreting my intentions. I criticize obsessive AI griping not because I'm enchanted by techbro promises or "stanning for billionaires," as you so colorfully put it. Rather, I'm urging a balanced perspective; it's entirely possible to scrutinize the energy usage of various technologies—including gaming—without resorting to hyperbolic doomsaying or personal attacks.

You ask if I'm a leftist, as if one's entire political alignment could be judged by their stance on a specific facet of technology. Engaging critically with technology doesn't equate to blind support of its most excessive implementations.

Let's use this platform to foster constructive debate, not sanctimonious sniping. We're all here because we give a damn about the world and its future, right? Let's not lose sight of that common ground.

I think we agree on several fundamental points, such as the inefficiency of current AI applications and the problematic capitalist motivations driving much of its development.

That being said, completely dismissing the technology because of its current misuse may prevent us from exploring and identifying genuinely valuable applications. For instance, in research and industrial settings, AI has shown promise in optimizing processes, reducing waste, and performing complex data analysis. These are areas where the potential benefits might rightly justify the resource expenditure. China's approach, which includes heavy state involvement and regulation, might offer some insights.

Let's focus on creating specific and actionable plans that address the root issues rather than being caught in the binary of defense vs. criticism.

Leftism is obsessively AI and musk posting as if it were a full time job, and the more you do that the more leftist you are.

Remind the people why you had to take like a year off from posting (during which time the site was noticeably less annoying). Was it because you're too confrontational and were getting into to many heated arguments with people about stupid shit?

Scroll up homie, you replied to me (and edited your comments after posting as usual which is considered poor forum etiquette tsk tsk).

Little known fact: If one can Musk-post exactly ten thousand times, it results in an insta-kill, freeing the denizens of earth from his tyrannical grasp once and for all.

There's also the energy usage around obsessively gripe-posting about AI to consider.

This is why we need a watts-used-per-unit-of-entertainment scale going so we can determine a treat hierarchy.

idealistic lib shit

Yeah, I said myself I didn't think it would work (outside of the context of somewhere like China). I'm trying to redirect the discussion from simply obsessing about it to something more material. The Luddites accomplished jack shit, and we're headed down the same path right now without specific demands or plans.

I also explicitly said this particular application is a waste of energy and I'm not defending it at all. What I'm saying is, there ARE legit use cases, which makes the issue more slippery.

There's never going to be actual progress with this technology because of capitalism

You realize China is researching this technology too? They're putting billions into it. And also it has progressed wildly in the last couple of years in the US (which is not good honestly for them to be in the lead). This shit is happening if we like it or acknowledge it or not.