“But it also takes a lot of energy to train a human,” Altman said. “It takes like 20 years of life and all of the food you eat during that time before you get smart. And not only that, it took the very widespread evolution of the 100 billion people that have ever lived and learned not to get eaten by predators and learned how to figure out science and whatever, to produce you.”
So in his view, the fair comparison is, “If you ask ChatGPT a question, how much energy does it take once its model is trained to answer that question versus a human? And probably, AI has already caught up on an energy efficiency basis, measured that way.”
And humans also built the fucking power plants and pay for the energy they use, asshole.
People fucking hate AI now, surely talking about humanity as if they are a bunch of livestock will turn that sentiment right around.
Altman, Thiel, Musk, et al, need to be headed to the gallows.
Maybe we could use altman to fuel the ai? As charcoal?
I can outperform ai while being powered by a bag of cinema popcorn, sit your bitch arse down
Hey don’t get angry at me, it is them immigrants fault I had to dehumanize you
Those lazy immigrants, sitting at home doing nothing, taking all our welfare and jobs.
AI actually kind of manages to do that: it takes jobs and then doesn’t do them (or at least doesn’t do them nearly as well as the humans it replaces).
by this logic AI has also used the knowledge of 100 billion people and has the same starting energy debt as a person. with the added bonus that it can’t actually create anything new. Even their dumbass arguments can’t stand under their own weight
wouldn’t let that nerd fix a paper jam. visionary hallucinations. by that logic we should all die so ai might live cheaper. amen
These people fundamentally do not think about human life in a normal way.
It literally warms my heart to know they are all just as temporary as the rest of us. And how afraid they are of being dust in the wind
Started from “for good of humanity” and now we’re at “humans use a lot of energy”. Man why does everything have to suck like that.
Someone on Bluesky pointed out that, even if you ignore the morality of this argument, AI is trained on human content, so if we’re going to start examining the human energy cost, we’ll have to factor in the cost of every single human whose work was used by ChatGPT on top of the data center costs.
Which makes the fact that their predictive text models are incapable of original thought that much more absurd.
There’s an easy answer to this problem.
Do you think we could actually get that much processing power out of Sam Altman if we shoved him in one of those things though?
No :( they need a brain to work
Oligarchs see human as disposable resources
We need to start seeing them as disposable obstacles to a better future
he’s full of shit. to the little fuck that downvoted me for saying this. suck sam altman’s dick you little shit
fuckers like him are ruining and want to kill the middle class without thinking about what happens after everyone and everything is replaced with slop.
there is a difference between using AI for hobbies and using AI as a bullshit excuse to make most of the population homeless with no safeguards in place once they can’t pay the bills. add onto the fact that cheeto orangutan president is making it more and more impossible to make out a living in all sectors of life in the western world.
Oh good, the Bitcoin argument.
“Sure, Bitcoin wastes a lot of energy, but you know what else wastes energy? The Visa payment network.”
Yeah, but Visa handles six quadrispillion transactions per megawatthour, Bitcoin handles two drug purchases. Not the same results, is it?
So yeah, training humans takes a lot of energy. But in the end, you get a coherent, capable and well functioning individual. Spend the same energy on training LLMs and you get a system that’ll happily tell you to glue the cheese on pizza or something.
Not trying to defend the idiotic argument, but feels like more often than not the human output is not what I would call coherent, capable and well functioning.
Well to be fair, we’re putting those resources into AI and not schools.
Well another argument they have is the amount of waste that comes with the churn of fiat currency, where we inflate asset values in order to deliberately grow aggregate demand.
The housing bubble for instance was obviously cheap debt, which was used to grow aggregate consumption, by rewarding asset holders thus encouraging them to offload their asset to increase the velocity of money.
On the gold standard the average mortgage was 7 years, which was because there was less need to grow the money supply, because we werent trying to force an inflation target. Massive windfalls werent common, and thus housing wasnt being bid up via the cantillon effect, so was better for society in many ways when consumption wasnt being forced onto people.
Yeah because nobody drugs with any other method than bitcoin. Clutch those pearls harder while you wash down your leagal and totally not drugs pharmaceutical pills and alcohol.
Ha! I have never had a disease nor one sip of the alghoul’s poison.
Tech bros deal in false equivalencies. In general they rely on the playbook of logical fallacies. The one they rely on most is the presumption that the technology they’re trying to sell is correct by default as if it’s a fundamental law of the universe. And that the onus is on others to prove them wrong. Rather than them having to prove its correctness.
They often resort to ad hominem by implying their detractors lack intelligence or they’re emotional. This again draws on more logical fallacy that because they deal in technology it means they presume to own the position of being purely objective and correct by default. So anyone who says otherwise is disputing science itself.
In other words they never have to prove the veracity of the technology they’re trying to sell because they divert the discourse off topic to frivolous arguments about something else.
