• teletext@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    130
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    Bill Gates says the massive power draw required for AI processing is nothing to worry about as AI will ultimately identify ways to help cut power consumption and drive the transition to sustainable energy.

    The final solution the AI comes up with: Cut the power of the poor, euthanize the old and weak.

    • Wogi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      53
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      If it were actually AI I might have some faith.

      This isn’t a neural net processor, not a learning computer. It’s a fucking mechanical Turk. A bad one.

      What he’s talking about isn’t capable of deriving new ideas. It’s just going to spit out shit it’s seen already.

      The library of Babel is just as likely to give us the answers he’s talking about. More likely maybe because it’s at least already written down.

      • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        5 months ago

        I wonder if all this is to burn enough energy to make ignorant people believe that we have AI. And then use that AI as a justification of the existing order of things, the same way “civil contract” is. That it’s not really technical, but rather a very big and expensive propaganda campaign for abolishing democracies.

    • mumblerfish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      5 months ago

      Wow, that is so dumb. I saw some crack pot dude trying to solve unsolved physics problems by using prompts like “imagine you are Einstein, then how would you solve: …”. Good to see he is not alone, but has Bill fucking Gates with similarly dumb AI takes.

      • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        This is even more dumb when even Joan f-g Rowling in her books about magic for children described how and why magic can’t do this. One of the reasons I like Harry Potter - not for the plot or the human part, but for the magic there being quite similar to computers in our time. With similar limitations, except for unique cases.

        So no matter how much one hates Rowling (I don’t, she’s done more good than evil by far still), she’s smarter and more decent than most of the humanity. That sucks.

        • Ledivin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          5 months ago

          So no matter how much one hates Rowling (I don’t, she’s done more good than evil by far still), she’s smarter and more decent than most of the humanity. That sucks.

          Lol. She lucked into an amazing world that managed to remain a good story despite her writing, not because of it. She’s not an idiot, but literally every other piece of writing she’s ever put out kinda slams the “smarter than most of humanity” line.

          • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            She’s not an idiot, but literally every other piece of writing she’s ever put out kinda slams the “smarter than most of humanity” line.

            EDIT: accidental keypress

            This happens and doesn’t mean that she

            lucked into an amazing world that managed to remain a good story despite her writing, not because of it

            , everyone who has, you know, actually created something knows that from experience.

            • Ledivin@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              They weren’t meant to be causative, and I stand by both of my statements. Her writing is objectively bad, and it’s a small miracle that she didn’t manage to ruin this series like everything else she’s written. Yes, I know those are strong words, and yes, I do believe them.

              • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                Well, how can one speak about some thing’s author, the person who has built it from scratch, as of someone who can ruin it or not?

                That said, it’s hard for me to read her in English, and I’ve read HP mostly in at least three translations to Russian, one official and two unofficial ones. The former sucks, and from the latter two the one which reads the best is by the least professional translator (actually she’s not a translator at all), and I mean Maria Spivak (the original one to circulate in the Runet and samizdat versions, not the abomination published much later).

                It communicates the feeling of mad and a bit hooligan-ish fairy tale, I suspect that emotionally it’s the closest to the original.

                Anyway, it’s pretty normal for an author to have a magnum opus and the rest of their works to just not make sense.

    • JoShmoe@ani.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Dead wrong. AI is not as reliable as their makers would like to believe. AI is more likely to adopt all the flaws of humanity than make anything “better.” A subjective term.

      • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        5 months ago

        It’s a text generator. All these people, were they to live in Antiquity, would jump ship to ship trying to visit every oracle and prophet in the Mediterranean asking questions about universe and seeking deep meaning in short texts of the Chinese fortune cookie kind.

    • Fades@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      how about euthanize the entire planet? Just put us out of our fucking misery already goddamn

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        I hate that they decided to have Morpheus hold up a battery instead of a processor because some empty suit thought audiences were too stupid to get it.

        • imecth@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          The whole thing never made much sense anyways, machines would be without scrupules and cut off any redundancies like extra limbs, they’d probably just keep your brain in a jar.

          • kronisk @lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Well, perhaps that process would be more difficult and resource-intensive in this hypothetical scenario, so it would be much easier and less hassle to just keep the bodies alive?

        • EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Didn’t it also have something to do with a brand deal? Like the suit got extra funding for the movie by making a deal with Duracell to have their batteries in the movie or something.

  • Damage@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    71
    ·
    5 months ago

    Bill Gates says the massive power draw required for AI processing is nothing to worry about as AI will ultimately identify ways to help cut power consumption and drive the transition to sustainable energy.

    We already know how

    • mutant_zz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      ·
      5 months ago

      Yeah, this is one of the many things that annoys me about AI discourse.

      “We can use it to solve climate change!”

      We already technically know how to solve climate change, but politics makes doing that impossible.

      And, no, AI can’t “fix” politics. We’re going to have to figure that out by ourselves.

      • laurelraven@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Climate scientists: “do these things to fix climate change”
        Everyone: “but that’s HAAARD and I don’t wanna!”
        AI developers: create AI
        Climate scientists: “AI is drawing massive power accelerating climate change, we need to stop that”
        Everyone: “but it can tell us how to fix climate change so it’s going to be okay!”
        AI climate model: “do these same things to fix climate change”
        Everyone: “but that’s HAAARD and I don’t wanna!”

        Yeah, I can’t see any way this could possibly fail…

    • Contravariant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      5 months ago

      In a way AI refusing to recommend using so much computing power on LLMs could well be the first sign of actual intelligence.

    • Tronn4@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Ai told my power company to tell us to stop using energy during the day beucase ai needs the power to do the power co.pqnies jobs

  • schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    65
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    So if we light the planet on fire to fuel the AI, the AI will then tell us how to put the fire out.

    Okay sure, but how about we just… don’t do any of that?

  • LovingHippieCat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    Breaking: Rich tech guy thinks that the energy draw from rich tech projects is nothing to worry about.

  • Phegan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    Mr anti climate change says not to worry when it benefits him.

    Fuck bill gates, fucking nepo-baby

  • blindbunny@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    Bill Gates shouldn’t worry about people wanting to make a tent from his skin.

  • shortwavesurfer@monero.town
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    5 months ago

    Oh, gotcha. So crypto mining is bad, because he can’t make money off of it. But AI is just fine, because he can make tons of money off of it. I understand now. Makes perfect sense.

  • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Can I worry about the fact the most serious AI’s are owned by large companies, and that they are being taught to replace artists, writers and creatives?

    What a sad fucking dystopia we live in.

    • Zangoose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      If he was counting his money in $100 bills it would still take him about 40 years,

      Edit: assuming he counts 1 $100 bill per second

  • Ricky Rigatoni@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    Ricky says Bill Gates needs to shut the fuck up. You have thousands of times more money than any human will ever need leave the rest of us alone you fucking demon.

  • masquenox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    5 months ago

    Of all the celebrity billionaire parasites this one is the one I hate the most. At least Elon and Bezos has the decency to show us what scumbags they are… they don’t call Gates “No.1 Sugar Daddy To The PR industry” for nothing.