Wait till they learn about the environmental impacts of the oil industry, or the plastic industry.
Don’t worry folks, if we all stop using plastic straws and take 30 second showers, we’ll be able to offset 5% of the carbon emissions this AI has!
Removed by mod
…You joined 3 days ago. 🤣
Removed by mod
Sadly, yes.
You were definitely a redditor, right?
That’s an insult around this here fora, boy
Sounds like not using Google search would be a way more effective way of reducing CO2
Google ghg emissions in 2023 are 14.3 million metric tons. Which are a ridiculous percentage of global emissions.
Commercial aviation emissions are 935.000 million metric tons by year.
So IDK about plastic straws or google. But really if people stopped flying around so much that would actually make a dent on global emissions.
Don’t get me wrong, google is a piece of shit. But they are not the ones causing climate change, neither is AI technology. Planes, cars, meat industry, offshore production… Those are some of the truly big culprits.
i cant afford to ride airplanes. you are welcome.
This person has no personality!
He needs to travel!
well pay me the tickets and i will gladly do more international flights everywhere.
I’d rather we give up AI than give up meat or flying. I am not taking a ship half way across the world.
You do you. But other people may have other priorities.
Anyway, how many times have an user to use an AI to even come close to a single commercial plate through the Atlantic? It may be a freaking lot.
You giving away AI, or even forcing all humandkind to do so, might as well do nothing as far as climate change is concerned.
I still believe there are other priorities over one trip every couple of years. Flight is one of the greatest achievements of humanity and I firmly believe it is important to visit other cultures.
It’s great if you can afford it. If you can afford to fly even a couple times a year you’re pretty privileged. I can’t, and I’m still privileged.
I’m not sure about that. I live in a country that is suffering a lot because of tourism. And I’m not very fond of it.
Sometimes I prefer that people would just read our Wikipedia page instead of coming here.
I gather from your comments that you live in Spain, right? You guys suffer from all the 20€ flights going there from other European countries. At those prices you’ll mostly encounter human trash (I know this because I’m from Germany and the the majority of Germans visiting Spain are morons), so I feel with you. These cheap flights need to stop. I’d like to see the kerosene taxed fully for European flights. Have the prices be something to think about.
But they are not the ones causing climate change
The owners of google are capitalists. They are as responsible for climate change as any other capitalist.
Capitalists serve customers and do not operate in a vacuum. This finger pointing does nothing productive.
Capitalists
serve customershoard wealth through reckless profiteering irregardless of the costs to the rest of human society and do not operate in a vacuum.FTFY. I do agree with your last part, though. The political racketeer establishments that enable them and the fascist security institutions that protect them are equally as culpable as they are.
Somebody is hitting a homerun!
Chad
Capitalists have captured regulation and to a large extent democracy in the US. So finger pointing towards them is entirely useful. Especially given they spend good money to point the finger at us.
Bro… Most peoples “personalities” revolves around “travel”
Telling them to stop brain dead tourism will not accept! Fuck your climate
And it’s only 10x more useless :)
To be fair, it was never “hidden” since all the top 5 decided that GPU was the way to go with this monetization.
Guess who is waiting on the other side of this idiocy with a solution? AMD with cheap FPGA that will do all this work at 10x the speed and similar energy reduction. At a massive fraction of the cost and hassle for cloud providers.
Google already has their own TPUs, under the name Coral
Where are all the people that were so damn pissed with Bitcoins power consumption now?
Or was it never about the power consumption in the first place and now that little Timmy has an Ai buddy the waste of electricity is fine. SMH
It’s far more important that every country fixes how it legally generates power that isn’t green. Make burning coal illegal already.
You’re literally responding to an article criticising the power consumption of ai. What do you mean where are the people? They’re right here.
The one article that’s popped up in months of nothing. There was a larger response from people when it was something they saw as worthless using large quantities of power compared to the “helpful ai” that’s consuming the power now.
Shows that it never was about the environment in the first place. Hypocrites.
Criticisms of Bitcoin didn’t really become popular until years after its introduction. Give it time.
So-called “AI” is worthless too so they’ll get their turn.
I’d think there’s some serious god damn overlap between the groups that are pissed about these things.
Or was it never about the power consumption in the first place and now that little Timmy has an Ai buddy the waste of electricity is fine. SMH
I don’t think I want to waste my energy on hating these hypocrite Timmies since I haven’t yet encountered a single one of them.
Removed by mod
We hate both.
It’s a different debate because bitcoiners lose literally nothing to green power laws and banning coal. AI users would see a reduction in output quality/speed.
Crypto bros would definitely not be happy, because it would make mining less profitable
Wow AI is just so amazing
All of this just to give rich shareholders even more money.
I’m surprised it’s only 10x. Running a prompt though a llm takes quite a bit of energy, so I guess even the regular searches take more energy than I thought.
Same. I think I’ve read that a single GPT-4 instance runs on a 128 GPU cluster, and ChatGPT can still take something like 30s to finish a long response. A H100 GPU has a TDP of 700w. Hard to believe that uses only 10x more energy than a search that takes milliseconds.
If these guys gave a shit they’d focus on light based chips, which are in very early stages, but will save a lot of power.
you mean the IBM light chips and bus ?
I wonder what the power consumption of getting to the information in the summary is as a whole when using a regular search, clicking on multiple links, finding the right information and extracting the relevant parts. Including the expenditures of energy by the human performing the task and everything that surrounds the activity.
There are real concerns surrounding AI, I wonder if this is truly one of them or if it’s just poorly researched ragebait.
And yet it’s still garbage…like their search
With adblock enabled I feel like their results are often better than for example Duckduckgo. I recently switched to using DDG as my standard search engine but I regularly find myself using Google instead to get the results I’m looking for.
Interesting, I’m actually the exact opposite. I always start with Google, because it’s usually good enough, but whenever it takes 2-3 tries to get something relevant, I switch to ddg and get it first try.
My issue is mostly with image search results. DDG’s images tend to be less relevant than Google’s. DDG also lacks “smart” results (idk the official term).
For example when you search “rng 25” on Google, it will immediately present you with a random number between 1 and 25. On DDG you have to click on one of the search results and then use some website to generate the number.
Or when searching for the results of a soccer game, Google will immediately present all the stats to you, while on DDG you will only find some articles about it.
Of course it really depends on the kind of search and I’m sure DDG will regularly have better results than Google too.
One example I had with DDG image search was transparent electronics, I couldnt find a way to get electronics with a transparent case, DDG would only give me generic electronics images that had transparency. Google got it though
Those kinds of things are what people often take issue with Google about. Well, the second one anyway. The first is arguably not a search and is instead a calculation, but I admit that’s a little semantical.
The first however, is Google taking information provided by third parties, and presenting it to the user. It prevents traffic from flowing through to the original site, and is something actively complained about.
And I should care about that because? Google is sparing me from visiting a website that will harass me to accept cookies, complain about my adblocker, probably request to send notifications, etc.
The same reason we don’t let companies sell photocopies of books? This isn’t a take on piracy, to be clear. This is a take on one company stealing content from another, and serving it up as if it were their own. And when Google has a monopoly on search, that fucks over everyone but Google, including you.
Extracting information from the internet that is freely available isn’t exactly stealing content. Haven’t you ever copied something from Wikipedia? Why would Wikipedia even exist if people can’t use and share its content?
I’m genuinely curious where their penny picking went? All of tech companies shove ads into our throats and steal our privacy justifying that by saying they operate at loss and need to increase income. But suddenly they can afford spending huge amounts on some shit that won’t give them any more income. How do they justify it then?
Because data is king and sessions are going to be worth a lot more than searches. Go through the following
-
Talk to a LLM about what product to buy
-
Search online for a product to buy
Which one gives out more information about yourself?
-
It’s another untapped market they can monopolize. (Or just run at a loss because investor’s are happy with another imaginary pot of gold at the end of another rainbow.)
Perception. If a company isn’t on the leading edge we don’t consider them the best.
Regardless if you use them or not, if Google didn’t touch AI but Edge did you would believe edge is more advanced.
It doesn’t even need to appeal to you the user, but given the AI Gold Rush, they would have very unhappy investors if they did not.
Very good point
I build AI for a living, and I can tell you that generative AI is a crock of shit.
I use generative ai sometimes, and I find it useful for certain usecases.
Are you just following the in ternate hate bandwagon or do you really think it’s no good?
Generative AI has yet to actually solve a real business problem, let alone a problem that consumers actually have.
It’s creating content that floods internet spaces and workplace wikis faster than we can sort it.
AI-generated content is basically plastic: disposable, cheaper and worse quality than alternatives (human labor), and once it enters the ocean (the internet) will require humans to manually fish out and dispose of.
Summary:
- AI’s rapid growth has transformed digital life, but its significant environmental impact remains largely unchecked.
- AI-powered features can consume up to 10 times more electricity than traditional searches, potentially equating to a country’s power usage.
- The proliferation of energy-intensive data centers powering AI is outpacing the electric grid’s capacity, forcing utilities to maintain fossil fuel plants for reliability.
- Estimates suggest AI could account for 9% of U.S. energy demand by 2030, substantially contributing to climate change.
- Lack of industry transparency and mandatory reporting makes quantifying AI’s full environmental toll difficult.
- Tech companies negotiate discounted utility rates, shifting costs to ratepayers and reducing incentives for energy efficiency.
- Government regulation has been slow and industry-influenced, focusing on hypothetical future risks over current, tangible harms.
- The burden of AI’s environmental impact disproportionately falls on Global South communities where data centers are located.
- Tech companies resist mandatory disclosures, prioritizing profits over sustainability while the public bears the physical costs.
Just curious. Do your summaries are made by you, human?
Used AI to summarize article about misuse of AI.
Genius.
Using AI the correct way 👌
Its not even hidden, people just give zero fucks about how their magical rectangle works and get mad if you try t9 tell them.
