this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2024
1565 points (97.7% liked)

memes

15695 readers
4540 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago (6 children)

I'd like all ai service to publish the energy used in training the model and performing inference.

"Queries uses an average of X kWh of power. A model training run requires X MWh, and the development of this model over the years required X TWh of power."

Then we could judge companies by that metric. Off course, rich people would look for the most power-draining model for the sake of it.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (4 children)

That's already something that Meta is doing for their Llama models:

Source

You can extrapolate openai models consumption from these I guess

[–] [email protected] 8 points 10 months ago (3 children)

ok, but

  1. Is it still bad if they use renewables? in which case, it's not horrendous, is it?

  2. what about the rest of their servers?

  3. Fuck facebook

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago
  1. Power consumption is still power consumption, so 2 290 000kgCo2 is a lot, even if it's way lower than what it would have been with coal plants
  2. They only talk about power consumption and not server hardware footprint, cause power consumption is the easier to offset
  3. Yes
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)