image description (contains clarifications on background elements)
Lots of different seemingly random images in the background, including some fries, mr. crabs, a girl in overalls hugging a stuffed tiger, a mark zuckerberg “big brother is watching” poser, two images of fluttershy (a pony from my little pony) one of them reading “u only kno my swag, not my lore”, a picture of parkzer parkzer from the streamer “dougdoug” and a slider gameplay element from the rhythm game “osu”. The background is made light so that the text can be easily read. The text reads:
i wanna know if we are on the same page about ai.
if u diagree with any of this or want to add something,
please leave a comment!
smol info:
- LM = Language Model (ChatGPT, Llama, Gemini, Mistral, ...)
- VLM = Vision Language Model (Qwen VL, GPT4o mini, Claude 3.5, ...)
- larger model = more expensivev to train and run
smol info end
- training processes on current AI systems is often
clearly unethical and very bad for the environment :(
- companies are really bad at selling AI to us and
giving them a good purpose for average-joe-usage
- medical ai (e.g. protein folding) is almost only positive
- ai for disabled people is also almost only postive
- the idea of some AI machine taking our jobs is scary
- "AI agents" are scary. large companies are training
them specifically to replace human workers
- LMs > image generation and music generation
- using small LMs for repetitive, boring tasks like
classification feels okay
- using the largest, most environmentally taxing models
for everything is bad. Using a mixture of smaller models
can often be enough
- people with bad intentions using AI systems results
in bad outcome
- ai companies train their models however they see fit.
if an LM "disagrees" with you, that's the trainings fault
- running LMs locally feels more okay, since they need
less energy and you can control their behaviour
I personally think more positively about LMs, but almost
only negatively about image and audio models.
Are we on the same page? Or am I an evil AI tech sis?
IMAGE DESCRIPTION END
i hope this doesn’t cause too much hate. i just wanna know what u people and creatures think <3
I don’t see how AI is inherently bad for the environment. I know they use a lot of energy, but if the energy comes from renewable sources, like solar or hydroelectric, then it shouldn’t be a problem, right?
The problem is that we only have a finite amount of energy. If all of our clean energy output is going toward AI then yeah it’s clean but it means we have to use other less clean sources of energy for things that are objectively more important than AI - powering homes, food production, hospitals, etc.
Even “clean” energy still has downsides to the environment also like noise pollution (impacts local wildlife), taking up large amounts of space (deforestation), using up large amounts of water for cooling, or having emissions that aren’t greenhouse gases, etc. Ultimately we’re still using unfathomably large amounts of energy to train and use a corporate chatbot trained on all our personal data, and that energy use still has consequences even if it’s “clean”
i kinda agree. currently many places still use oil for engery generation, so that kinda makes sense.
but if powered by cool solar panels and cool wind turbine things, that would be way better. then it would only be down to the production of GPUs and the housing.
Also cooling! Right now each interaction from each person using chatGPT uses roughly a bottle’s worth of water per 100 words generated (according to a research study in 2023). This was with GPT-4 so it may be slightly more or slightly less now, but probably more considering their models have actually gotten more expensive for them to host (more energy used -> more heat produced -> more cooling needed).
Now consider how that scales with the amount of people using ChatGPT every day. Even if energy is clean everything else about AI isn’t.