“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.”
Wasn’t technology developed to improve humanity’s quality of life? Are we being compared with it and determined as inefficient now?
Aren’t humans and biological creatures in general found to be extremely efficient with energy? Given the computing power in our brains the fact it runs on so little is amazing no?
Doesn’t the human brain do what it does on like the same electricity as a lightbulb?
12 watts maybe. But there is no currents and flashes like internet bullshit images.
What kind of bulb are we talking here?
In Altman’s case it’s a dimbulb.
Yes, it’s disingenuous for him to bring up all the time used for humans to evolve as well. If we’re going to go that far, we also ought to include the energy/time used by the engineers who created ChatGPT, and all the energy used by plants/animals in the evolution leading to those engineers. Not to mention all the time/energy/training of all the people who created the training data over the past few centuries.
Frankly, at that point, any human artist is more “efficient” than AI - they’re able to master their field in mere decades.
I really don’t think he meant it that way. Think of it like this - if I want to generate some images, my GPU will run at 100% for few minutes. If I want to play cyberpunk, my GPU will run at 100% for hours.
I think if he meant it that way he would have said that, instead of talking about the energy that humans use and particularly talking about food.
Fuck Sam Altman, fucking cunt
It’s like he asked his chatbot to come up with this argument.
His argument is his computer is more important than other people, and he’s willing to deprive them of resources to death.
creating the “ai” in the first place also required the evolution of those 100 billion people. So by that argument, he was behind before he even started, and it’s impossible to catch up
a master class in what-about-ism
Somebody actually did the math, and even accounting for all the energy that it takes for a human to stay alive a pair of decades, it’s not even a hundredth of the energy needed to run the training of GPT-3. And GPT-4 took over fifty times that. Cf. fosstodon.org/@atoponce/116121…
RE: fosstodon.org/users/atoponce/s…oof! apply water to the burn- oh wait we don’t have any!
More like 40, but I get your point.
train a human
This guy has the same level of empathy as Zuck.
dystopian novel type shit
Idk maybe we should do something about this man.
do it
I’ll get this one if you take Thiel
Silicon valley was a huge source of revenue for America… And when you have one industry, or a bunch of individuals making all the money - it risks authoritarianism capture of democracy.
That’s just capitalism working as intended.
Train him?
lmao best comment ever
Why? He’s doing his best to show how absurd our current system is.
I wonder why nobody has Mangione’d those filthy millionaires yet.
I have no idea why people keep using an innocent man’s name to talk about murdering people.
He didn’t do anything, so saying that you Mangione someone it means you don’t do anything with him =]
Well, they’re trying to kill him (Luigi), so that’s a valid interpretation.
Any of those man-eating predators still around?
He’s not efficient enough for current construct. Exterminate!
The humans still exist and need food, even if they are replaced by chatbots in the workforce. The comparison is therefore useless, unless you plan to murder the unemployed.
A modest proposal
unless you plan to murder the unemployed.
Well, that’s precisely what some of the Trump-aligned fascists are suggesting on live television.
What the shit
Also
involuntary lethal injection
as opposed to voluntary?? He’s trying to soften the language by adding that (totally redundant) extra adjective to remove focus from the ‘lethal’ part
How the fuck does involuntary soften the language?
Plan is obvious… to me. Why not so to everybody else
but PER QUESTION how many kilowatt hours are they using. not just in their heads, in their hearts and in their booties.
I don’t but the police work for me since I am a billionaire and they can murder the unemployed for me!
To save the working man, you’ve got to put him out to pasture
Soup us Good Food - Dead Kennedys
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.
Y’know what uses the most resources, Sammy?
BILLIONAIRES!
…we should eat them.
I’d prefer composting and growing veggies.
you sure any veggies would be able to grow?
I am pretty positive, yes. Hair and nails alone are already good fertilizers.
People fucking hate AI now, surely talking about humanity as if they are a bunch of livestock will turn that sentiment right around.
