Self-indulgent rant:

One reason why IMO, the case against "AI" is as cut and dried as the case against cryptocoins is that shutting those two sectors down through government action would immediately solve the household energy transition for Iceland, for example

The maths is fairly straightforward: switching personal transportation over to electricity here would roughly double household power consumption (give or take, with the assumption that current plans to improve public transport pan out)

We don't have that much excess power generation. We even have to occasionally limit power delivery to heavy users

Increasing power generation that much requires tough choices: we'd have to ruin the environment some way. We just don't have that many locations left for hydro or geothermal. Most locations that remain are popular tourist sites—destroying them would be bad for the economy—important ecosystems, or would require improvements to the grid that nobody seems to be willing to pay for

However, datacentres in Iceland are almost exclusively used for "AI" or crypto. You can't buy regular hosting in these centres for love or money. If you buy hosting in Iceland, odds are that the rack is in an office building in Reykjavík somewhere, not a data centre

And those data centres use more power than Icelandic households combined

But, instead, the plan is currently to destroy big parts of places like Þjórsárdalur valley, one of the most green and vibrant ecosystems in Iceland

That’s one of the reasons why I take it personally when people use “AI” models and cryptocoins. You are being complicit in creating the demand that is threatening to directly destroy the environment I live in. None of this shit would be happening if there wasn't demand so I absolutely do blame you, personally, if you are a regular user of either of these things

There’s a cost to these tools and you’re pushing it onto others like an asshole

So, fuck you and the AI-generated horse you rode in on

@baldur seems every time we get a new tool, this happens. Previously was when car manufacturers started to use robots. I'm sure people who made horse drawn wagons said the same thing when cars started to get popular.

@chrisamoody @baldur

Bringing up the example of cars, compared to the energy consumption and environmental impact of the trains and trolleys they displaced ...

That's not the flex you think it is. Quite the opposite.

@isaackuo I was more referring to the use of new tools causing the fear of displaced workers

@chrisamoody

Okay, but ... relevance?

The discussion about AI and crypto data centers in Iceland was about the energy consumption and environmental impact, with a focus on the effect on transportation electrification.

There was no mention of workers or worker displacement.

@isaackuo I may have misinterpreted some of the words in the original toot I was replying to

@chrisamoody @baldur

The ecosystem that sustains us has limits. So too does human stupidity: when the ecosystem collapses, so do we.

@chrisamoody @baldur looking at the current state of environmental destruction, I'm inclined to agree with the hypothetical people protesting new tools in car manufacture.

In other words, you're using the existing status quo, which is literally in the process of rendering the planet uninhabitable, as a defense of something that's even more obviously destructive to the planet.

@kevingranade No doubt that AI has to become better at power consumption. Of course the fact that we have to use fossil fuels at all currently is simply awful, we should be 100% solar / wind by now.
@chrisamoody it needs to become like a dozen orders of magnitude more efficient and also start being worth using. Neither is plausible.
@kevingranade because humans think to small when it comes to good.
@baldur that was put so strongly – when you’re directly faced by the amount of waste vs what use that amount of energy could be put to, it’s really a done deal. even if it came through on all the promises the snake oil salesmen pulled out of their asses.
@baldur We're not far from the stage where environmental activists physically destroy these data centers or the power transmission infrastructure that supplies them.
@dalias lol, probably only after every museum exhibition has been defaced first because that provides so much more publicity. so the datacenters have time… a lot of it.

@tivasyk @dalias

There is, of course, no noticeable difference in security between these two areas!

@dalias @baldur

Have you seen "Woman at War"? That was against the aluminium industry rather than datacentres, but definitely seems applicable.

Weird, but highly recommended :)

@baldur I feel the same towards people who aren't vegans. You are being complicit etc. fuck you personaly etc.
@rgarcia Fuck you personally. I cannot eat most plant foods. They make me horribly ill.
@cxj oh my, you are ver personally fucked already! Nevermind, you are forgiven.
@rgarcia you are also forgiven. Thanks for your magnanimity.
@baldur Very clear. Do it. The AI bubble must burst, let's hope government in Iceland will stick a needle in it then, if not sooner.
@baldur
If only there was some sort of legislative body in Iceland that had the interest of the Icelanders !

@baldur I am on your side and this is a growing bone of contention for me with a project I am involved with.

The project is not yet using AI and doing so seems quite a way off, but the intent is to use it ‘for good’. I increasingly think there cannot be a net good, but there is so much else the project is trying to achieve that is laudable.

So… I can see an impasse coming

@baldur and the abomination of AI is coming to Apple Phones soon in iOS 18.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/article/2024/aug/24/apple-intelligence-iphone-ios-18-siri-chat-gpt-launch

If you have an Apple Phone the important bit is in the last paragraph:

"Q. Can I opt out?
A. Yes, you have to toggle on Apple Intelligence in Settings. So whether you are concerned about data privacy or sceptical about the accuracy or usefulness of these features, you are not obliged to use them."

Apple Intelligence is coming. Here’s what it means for your iPhone

Apple is about to launch a ChatGPT-powered version of Siri as part of a suite of AI features in iOS 18. What are the implications for how you use your phone – and for your privacy?

The Guardian
@baldur I make images with AI on my phone and my phone does the computing, no internet involved..
@wroof @baldur did you train the model on your phone, too? most of the energy that goes into "ai" is spent creating the model itself, which is why your phone can use the resulting model without melting down
@bugsong @baldur I didn’t train the model, no. I could train loras though, but I better get a new phone for that. I know training models costs much power, but running them gets more and more efficient.
@baldur a democratic government could limit or regulate these uses. it might be satisfying, might be morally accurate, to blame global demand, but that’s unlikely to be very effective. but you have a state. in fact you have the benefit of a state unusually close to you and your fellow citizens. rather than, or in addition to, raging on social media at market forces, i wish you every success in making use of it.

@baldur

I think there's another problem here too. We often look at new #energy hogs at cry foul, but the truth is large #stock #exchanges use almost as much needless energy per user and probably way more in the round because their use is near ubiquitous. But we turn a blind eye because we're already dependent on them.

@baldur

The conflation of AI models and cryptocurrency is something I disagree with but would like to put to the side.

Where do you differentiate AI models from other forms of computing?

For example, original computers which demanded huge amounts of power and environmental resources and maintenance staff were built to do computing, something we could do manually, but slower.

I use AI for situations where one 10-30 second computing request would save me (the human) 2-6 hours, or I might not have the human resources to do at all due to limitations.

I consider it an assistive technology. Do you disagree on this?

If you agree it's assistive, then where is the line of acceptable computing and unacceptable computing?

This should be the same regardless of whether it's AI or not, right?

@serge @baldur maybe it's not a matter of using or not using an assitive technology (cryptocoins definitly are not that and should be prohibited), but owning the consumption that using this technology incurs locally.

Instead of outsourcing LLMs to some datacenter, hiding their operating costs and externalities from you, you could run the LLMs locally, using an app like jan.ai?=

@csdumm

Yes, but I assume that when the person making this statement is Baldur, he already knows this and is taking this into his moral calculation.

@baldur

Baldur Bjarnason (@[email protected])

Self-indulgent rant: One reason why IMO, the case against "AI" is as cut and dried as the case against cryptocoins is that shutting those two sectors down through government action would immediately solve the household energy transition for Iceland, for example The maths is fairly straightforward: switching personal transportation over to electricity here would roughly double household power consumption (give or take, with the assumption that current plans to improve public transport pan out)

Toot Café
@baldur
As much as I am tempted to ask AI chatbots questions just for the entertainment value of the riduculous answers I avoid it for this reason.
@baldur
To paraphrase E. F. Schumacher, "Modern economics uses irreplaceable natural capital like it is income."

@peterfr didn't we wanna use ai to save thr planet? 🤡

@baldur