What country? Sir Lanka? This isn’t a useful comparison as is, I’ll see if I can dig up actual numbers.
Following for the results of your work here so I can use it in the future.
From this 2023 paper, looks like if all Nvidia AI servers are running 24/7, you’d get an energy consumption of about 5.7–8.9 TWh per year. Nvidia servers make up 95% of the AI market (according to the paper) so that’d be pretty close to what AI servers would consume.
The paper also estimates about 20% of crypto mining GPUs no longer mining etherium converted to AI, which contributed another 16.1 TWh per year.
This doesn’t include some AI, but it should be the majority.
Between those two sources, that gives 23.4 TWh per year. That gives 0.08 exta joules per year per this converter. That’s 22% of Sri Lanka’s energy consumption (which is the lowest country).
So AI in a year uses at much energy as Sri Lanka uses in 3 months. At least in 2023. I’ll see if I can find a more recent study.
So that assumes AI requests use 100 percent of the hardware 100 percent of the time.
There’s plenty of countries missing from that rankings list, and I bet those are the ones using less energy. Especially considering microstates like Vatican, the statement could be technically correct
This does misunderstand what actually costs the energy – it’s training the models that’s costly, not using the already trained ones. Although to be fair using them increases incentive for new ones to be trained… But yeah asking ChatGPT for a recipe idea isn’t burning an ounce of gasoline.
Using them is also very energy intensive (though much less so than training).
Playing a AAA game amount of energy vs running an entire data center on full blast amount of energy, is the comparison I like to make.
While the order of magnitude is correct, running the bigger models is closer to playing a AAA game on 8 computers at the same time.
Yes, and now not just cringe gamers are using that electricity. At least that was an experience wholely unique, this is people delegating thought, artistry, and processing. Meaning now it can be use for passive things in day to day life.
The increase then can be measured by any time that wasnt spent on gaming, now needing a large enough mole hill to want and circumvent. Gaming already was escapism of social cognizant responsibilities, I say this as a dude who spent every 80 hours a week on gaming, and have 11k hours in league.
Circumventing these things outside of gaming will essentially lead to a dependency. I hardly trust adults to self govern, but kids I can see being swindled by the ‘ability’ granted. Rather than the dependency and lack of one’s innate thought and memory.
It just makes me scared, no I dont think it will ever fully replace a person’s mind, but it will grasp it. It can make a person doubtful of themselves and in doubt we are most persuadable. With recent politics nationwide trying to turn into fascist states fundamentally built on hate, I do not want kids to be raised persuaded without their will. While also removing part of their learning capabilities and reducing their capacity.
Cities will seem like labor mills to house the slaves, while being more aware of freedom than those truly free.
C’mon man Matrix was on this shit, if that’s too boring try adventure time.
(I don’t game anymore)
Right, I mentioned that the more they’re used the more incentive there is to train new ones. But also it’s not like buying a product from the store which then creates a demand for a replacement, it’s much fuzzier and it’s difficult to point to any one user as increasing the demand for more models. Realistically I think we’ve gone well past the point where it makes sense to train general purpose LLMs any further, it’s drastically diminishing returns for marginally higher quality. The continued fervor is being driven by the same people that drove crypto and NFT prices way beyond reality: speculators and VC parasites trying to shove the new hype buzzword into anything they can get their hands on.
people who complain about mountains of disposable diapers at landfills misunderstand the problem. it’s the poop of newborn babies that’s the problem, not the ones who have gone on to become adults. although to be fair their growing up increases the chance of more poop-producing babies.
but yeah sleeping around without birth control isn’t contributing to even one extra poop-filled diaper.
Miyazaki’s sadness was enough for me. He is right. This is humans losing faith in humans. Trust the machine, not yourself.
His popular AI quote is from 2016 and is missing a lot of context. What he was commenting on isn’t anything like the current generative AI wave. That being said, he doesn’t seem to have publicly rectified it so it might still represent his views.
Agreed. Based on ongoing circumstances and the general response from other high-profile animators in the industry, I am inclined to think that Miyazaki and others at Ghibli are still against AI art. But I also do feel that the quote from 2016 is being reused without the essential context.
Miyazaki opened his response by talking about a friend of his who suffers from a physical disability, which is entirely irrelevant to the topic of generative AI. In context, it was directed at a reinforcement-learning AI model that some artists implemented to try to animate human-like models in unorthodox and unnatural ways, with the proposed utility of using it for zombies or similar. Their suggestion was that these unnatural learned movements are meant to be seen as disturbing and monstrous.
The “insult to life itself” remark was with regards to how they seemed to be making a mockery of disability and, with his friend in mind, was not something he could approve of.
Don’t really see how that doesn’t relate. So its not a reinforcement learning model designed to make animations. Cool, the result is still the same. Humanity losing faith in itself quote really can’t be applied in a different way to only refer to this one specific model that was made to make terrifying animations, it clearly applies to handing all this human made work over to machines that dont understand why we make what we make. The machine, and subsequently the people who created it, were accused by Miyazaki of not knowing suffering. Not having any idea about something they were trying to emulate. This is what struck his core. The lack of empathy or connection to the subject. The root of all of our connections and bonds come from shared experience and empathy. He was speaking on the abandonment of these principles and AI is the epitome of it all.
That stuff Miyazaki said was before generative AI existed. He was commenting on procedural animation being used poorly in a 3D simulation. It’s fair to apply his sentiment to AI, but he himself was not talking about AI.
Those animations were cursed.
Somebody said The Apple ads for AI look like they’re describing the people who are the biggest pieces of shit you work with or know.
I found a blogpost that cites a Business Insider article that implies this claim as formulated is way off:
Reported energy use implies that ChatGPT consumes about as much energy as 20,000 American homes. An average US coal plant generates enough energy for 80,000 American homes every day. This means that even if OpenAI decided to power every one of its billion ChatGPT queries per day entirely on coal, all those queries together would only need one quarter of a single coal plant. ChatGPT is not the reason new coal plants are being opened to power AI data centers.
It goes on to argue that while it’s true that AI related electricity use is booming, it’s not because of LLM chatbots:
AI energy use is going to be a massive problem over the next 5 years. Projections say that by 2030 US data centers could use 9% of the country’s energy (they currently use 4%, mostly due to the internet rather than AI). Globally, data centers might rise from using 1% of the global energy grid to 21% of the grid by 2030. …
97% of the total energy used by AI as of late 2024 is not being used by ChatGPT or similar apps, it’s being used for other services. What are those services? The actual data on which services are using how much energy is fuzzy, but the activities using the most energy are roughly in this order:
* Recommender Systems - Content recommendation engines and personalization models used by streaming platforms, e-commerce sites, social media feeds, and online advertising networks.
* Enterprise Analytics & Predictive AI - AI used in business and enterprise settings for data analytics, forecasting, and decision support.
* Search & Ad Targeting - The machine learning algorithms behind web search engines and online advertising networks.
* Computer vision - AI tasks involving image and video analysis – often referred to as computer vision. It includes models for image classification, object detection, facial recognition, video content analysis, medical image diagnostics, and content moderation (automatically flagging inappropriate images/videos). Examples are the face recognition algorithms used in photo tagging and surveillance, the object detection in self-driving car systems (though inference for autonomous vehicles largely runs on-board, not in data centers, the training of those models is data-center based), and the vision models that power services like Google Lens or Amazon’s image-based product search.
* Voice and Audio AI - AI systems that process spoken language or audio signals. The most prominent examples are voice assistants and speech recognition systems – such as Amazon’s Alexa, Google Assistant, Apple’s Siri, and voice-to-text dictation services.
You conveniently seem to have left this part from your first linked article out of your argument:
De Vries estimated in the paper that by 2027, the entire AI sector will consume between 85 to 134 terawatt-hours (a billion times a kilowatt-hour) annually.
“You’re talking about AI electricity consumption potentially being half a percent of global electricity consumption by 2027,” de Vries told The Verge. “I think that’s a pretty significant number.”
How would I have used AI here, it’s mostly quotes from the article? You’re way off anyway, it actually took me a little while to try out different ways of formatting that list in Lemmy and making the hyperlinks in the quotes display correctly, let alone finding this in the first place as it was the source of the graph I had seen somewhere that I was thinking initially of posting, or reading the thing in order to pick out appropriate passages. To be clear, I have put way too much effort into writing internet comments over the years to be using LLMs for that now and I promise you I do not do that.
It’s super interesting that a nicely formatted, bulleted and quoted comment like yours was immediately accused of being Ai. I know that AI generally use a similar format when summarizing, but that’s just because it’s been trained on lots of people writing real summaries.
I’m worried that the new keyboard warriors of the internet are just going to be harassing people with AI accusations. I’ve seen gamedevs accused of having their store page text written by AI, artists who’ve had incredible and personal works doubted, and authors having organized harassment campaigns over false Ai suspicions. People are getting really overzealous about being anti AI and it’s getting a bit irrational.
