Lots of people on Lemmy really dislike AI’s current implementations and use cases.

I’m trying to understand what people would want to be happening right now.

Destroy gen AI? Implement laws? Hoping all companies use it for altruistic purposes to help all of mankind?

Thanks for the discourse. Please keep it civil, but happy to be your punching bag.

  • @givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    272 months ago

    AI people always want to ignore the environmental damage as well…

    Like all that electricity and water are just super abundant things humans have plenty of.

    Everytime some idiot asks AI instead of googling it themselves the planet gets a little more fucked

    • Libra00
      link
      fedilink
      English
      52 months ago

      Are you not aware that Google also runs on giant data centers that eat enormous amounts of power too?

        • Libra00
          link
          fedilink
          English
          52 months ago

          Per: https://www.rwdigital.ca/blog/how-much-energy-do-google-search-and-chatgpt-use/

          Google search currently uses 1.05GWh/day. ChatGPT currently uses 621.4MWh/day

          The per-entry cost for google is about 10% of what it is for GPT but it gets used quite a lot more. So for one user ‘just use google’ is fine, but since are making proscriptions for all of society here we should consider that there are ~300 million cars in the US, even if they were all honda civics they would still burn a shitload of gas and create a shitload of fossil fuel emissions. All I’m saying if the goal is to reduce emissions we should look at the big picture, which will let you understand that taking the bus will do you a lot better than trading in your F-150 for a Civic.

          • @givesomefucks@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            0
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Google search currently uses 1.05GWh/day. ChatGPT currently uses 621.4MWh/day

            And oranges are orange

            It doesn’t matter what the totals are when people are talking about one or the other for a single use.

            Less people commute to work on private jets than buses, are you gonna say jets are fine and buses are the issue?

            Because that’s where your logic ends up

            • Libra00
              link
              fedilink
              English
              12 months ago

              My point wasn’t ‘google is more expensive than chatgpt’, it’s that ‘google is also expensive, just not as expensive as chatgpt.’ It’s probably safe to say that no one has ever just done one google search or just asked one question of chatgpt, so the one-use cost is practically irrelevant compared to the average or collective use case.

    • @garbagebagel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      3
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      This is my #1 issue with it. My work is super pushing AI. The other day I was trying to show a colleague how to do something in teams and as I’m trying to explain to them (and they’re ignoring where I’m telling them to click) they were like “you know, this would be a great use of AI to figure it out!”.

      I said no and asked them to give me their fucking mouse.

      People are really out there fucking with extremely powerful wasteful AI for something as stupid as that.

    • @venusaur@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      12 months ago

      Nobody is getting this problem under control. AI users and developers are moving too fast now.

      It feels like developers will max out our resources before we can get a grip on it. I watched a podcast with Zuck talking about their ideas for new features that they can’t even develop because they’re be capped by infrastructure.