• wischi
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    6 months ago

    The problem is that using those tools no matter how energy efficient will add to the total amount of energy humans use, because even if an AI generates an image faster than a human could, the human still needs 100W constantly.

    This doesn’t mean, that we shouldn’t make it more efficient but let’s be honest, more energy efficient AI just means that we would use even more AI everywhere.

    • RmDebArc_5@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Solution: remove human

      That’s what a lot of news sites are doing, getting rid of large parts of the employees and having the remaining do the same work with LLM. If you burn the no longer needed employees as an alternative heating solution your energy usage drops effectively to zero

      • wischi
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        True, but It’s still not what I meant unless they kill those humans. The employees that did that work before still need the 100W. It might be that they can now do something else (or just be unemployed) but the net energy usage is not going down.

    • derpgon
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      But speaking of efficiency, a human can do more useful tasks while AI is crunching numbers. But that is very subjective.

      • wischi
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        It depends what you mean by useful. Most humans are (at least at the moment) more versatile than even the most advanced AI we have. But you have to keep in mind that there are jobs with pretty mundane tasks where you don’t really need the intelligence and versatility of a human.

        • derpgon
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Thats what I meant, keep the tasks separated, and let both what they do better than the other half.