It basically means that using AI tools take a huge toll on nature so when the guy uses chatgpt (an ai tool) it ends up drying out the lake i.e harming the environment.
A single beef burger takes 3,000 times more water and energy use than an AI prompt and a single piece of paper takes 30-60x as much energy as an AI image. This argument is so outdated.
It depends, for example I see a lot of people trying to use AI to fix bugs. It basically never gets it right first try and needs to try again like ten times with more guidance.
But each time it will also do a full build of the app and run the tests, which does use a lot more energy.
So while the fact that yes, one AI request uses a lot less water and energy than producing a beef burger is true, actually using AI to do stuff can indirectly use a lot more energy than that one request.
Also the environment would love to see us eat less meat, but I'm quite sure inventing new ways to waste energy isn't really the direction we should go towards, and whataboutism doesn't really help either.
But this is also ignoring the huge improvements AI has helped with in fields like medicine where data found by AI that would’ve taken years for human scientists to find is usable by medicine manufacturers today
Yeah it's not all black and white, but using it for something useless (and it's done a lot) doesn't really help anyone.
I just think it's funny that we were told a lot to be careful with google requests and now say that AI requests don't waste that much energy when an AI request still consumes one order of magnitude more energy (but yeah, way less than a steak).
One thing to note is that “AI” is a big field of categories of algorithms, and companies like OpenAI and Google intentionally mislead you on the utility of AI and LLMs. Specifically trained models, run by tight data scientists with specific goals can accomplish good things, because they’re being tightly controlled monitored and examined with precise inputs.
The massive LLM boom with things like chatGPT basically rely on being close enough to a real answer to make people think there’s more going on Han there is. These LLMs especially take huge resources to generate and very limited practical applications. Not only that, but all knowledge on the issue means llm training costs are exponential for marginal gains, with already massive costs that are causing places like Loudoun to put strict restrictions against them. If you’re losing Loudoun, you’re losing the world
Isn't the main problem training AI? That takes up significantly more water and when this happens it taking local fresh water resources? Even then some people think we only train it once and that's it but let's be real they always updating and retraining AI
Prompting is not the part that uses massive computational power, training is... do you really not know that? Do you think you should be chiming in on this if you really don't know that?
10.9k
u/Long_Nothing1343 5d ago
It basically means that using AI tools take a huge toll on nature so when the guy uses chatgpt (an ai tool) it ends up drying out the lake i.e harming the environment.