And also have their AIs read another 100 emails for them.

Is one supposed to be better than the other?

Using green energy for everything else frees up more fossil fuel for things that need it.

TAA as in temporal anti-aliasing? Is that not frame generation? It’s interpolating between frames to create a frame that wasn’t previously there. Just like how spatial anti-aliasing generates pixels that weren’t previously there.

I think maybe we have a different idea of what “generation” means. I’m guessing your idea of “generation” is when it surpasses some threshold of information added through the process.

Upscaling = artificially increasing the sampling rate through some sort of inter/extrapolation.

Temporal = it’s happening on the temporal axis.

Samples on the temporal axis are frames.

Therefore, temporal upscaling = artificially sampling more frames = frame gen?

You know what else takes far less energy than training a single model? One query. Yet, you argue that it’s the main contributor to the energy consumption. Why is that? It’s because there’s a very high volume of them, thus bringing up the total energy consumption. At the end of the day, it’s this total energy consumption that matters, not the cost of doing it once. Look at the total energy expenditure of training, not just the cost of doing it once.

So, it’s kind of weird t0 single AI energy use out here as some form of exceptional evil.

We’re talking about AI here because that’s the topic of this thread. I’ve never seen anyone say that it’s the only problem worth addressing. Plus, if you want to compare energy usage of ads (or anything else) compared to AI, you would first need to know how much energy AI is actually using.

Training is a continuous expenditure. We’re nearly ten years into this craze and we’re still continuously pumping out new models. Whether they’re trained from scratch or not is immaterial. Both processes still consume energy. If you want to justify the claim that training cost is negligible, you would have to show that this cost is actually going down over time and that it’s going down sufficiently quickly.

It doesn’t look like that energy consumption blog post account for the cost of training the model. Otherwise, it should be telling us how many queries/sessions are assumed to be run over the course of the lifetime of a model.

I like to keep to the same routine when possible. Birthdays and holidays interrupt that. No good. I can’t do much for holidays, but since my birthday is supposed to be my day, i can demand this from everyone around me.

I’m pretty sure OP is making chili to eat, not for a competition.

Multiple different accounts and their posts are all formatted exactly the same, so this does seem to be the case.

They never claimed that it was the whole thing. Only that it was part of it.

TIL oil barrels are held together by giant Phillips head screws.

How is this untrue? Generative pre-training is literally training the model to predict what might come next in a given text.

We have the term AGI because we sometimes want to communicate something more specific, and AI is too broad of a term.

Definitely. For the average home cook, that convenience is much more valuable than making your knives extra sharp.

Do the diamond stones need any kind of maintenance? I’ve read that you need to regularly flatten the surface of your typical whetstone.

Yeah, that much I agree with.

“They want people like me to not exist” is not a “general stance.”

No, that is not a general statement. “Someone that wants some group of people to not exist” is the general statement, and I belong to some group of people. Anything that applies to the general statement also applies to the specific one. I’m not about to list all groups of people in existence, but if you want to play the game where you make someone and I tell you whether or not the rule applies, I’m happy to play along.

Do you mean lemmyers? People with usernames that start with H?

Yes to all of the above, as long as they don’t infringe on anyone else’s right to live.

Don’t pretend that because you’re trying to conflate this with math that you’re somehow correct or logical.

Logic is math. Do you disagree with the comparison?

I’m speaking in generalities because it’s a very general stance.

What you’re doing is the equivalent of going to someone who says x+x=2x and and claiming they must not know what they’re saying because they’re not telling you what exact value x is.