Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Sheer bollocks (Score 1) 120

Maybe some very small pockets or extremophiles will survive, but it is not OUR right do choose their fate, nor is there any coming back from this. This civilisation will be done in 5-15yrs.

At 2 degrees rise the base of our food chain will be unable to survive and be functionally extinct - Coral Reef ecosystems .. Gone.
Even at 2 degrees phytoplankton and oceanic chemistry will be irreversably altered and acidified.
Larger ocean creatures therefore will have no food, they will already be closing in on extinction, through lack of sustinence, but also difficulty in breeding.

By 2030, - just 5yrs away - there will no longer be enough potable water to share round all the humans , or to water the crops we feed to the animals we eat. Something has to go or millions are going to die.

Consider that 2.1 degrees is essentially locked in.
Consider the number of people who essentially dont care, pretend its lies.
Consider the governments we have now elected to steward us through this, and how they are acting.
They tell us we must achieve "Net Zero" , but that is a wholly inadequate target and its too late.
Only net-negative will do - sadly theres no techology that scales or is efficient enough to do this, nor one that wouldnt cause
more Ecocide in the future. Rapid rewilding is the most scalable , effective method - but the efforts so far
have been ill researched, favour monoculture plantations and are not happening enough. Worse were planting forests, calling it "renewable" energy, burned for biomass or sold to ostentatious fools for their fashionable, opulent "wood burning stoves" beleiveing
them to be environmentally friendly. Meanwhile asthma inhalers price continues to rise and in the UK at least 32000 people a year die from air pollution.

Mark My Words, those who dont acknowledge this or will be the ones least equipped to survive the coming years if you cannot see the writing on the wall, perhaps you should go to specsavers, keep capitalism alive and kicking

Comment Not sure of the relevence of this study. (Score 1) 134

Ok so were now cheering AI with a built in bias they tested on people?
All this proves is that giving peopled biased information works.

In this case the bias is negative bias toward conspiracy theory.
But it could just as easily be done to refute the truth about climate change
or the troubles in the middle east.

Comment Re:What's fair? (Score 0) 142

"Should all artists get compensation from all AI companies that used their work to build a model?"

You are fundamentally misunderstanding how this works.
Building a "Model" does not include training it

Training the "Model" s the part where someone elses work is needed.

Ergo , you can build a model without infringing on anything.

Comment Not such a positive situation (Score 1) 25

Studies estimate that an AI model like ChatGPT-4 consumes around 2.9 Wh (watt-hours) per query for inference (i.e., generating responses).

Assuming 1 user uses the service 10 times per week:-
400 million users × 10 queries per user = 4 billion queries per week
4 billion queries × 2.9 Wh per query = 11.6 billion Wh
11.6 billion Wh = 11.6 GWh (gigawatt-hours) per week

11.6 GWh × 52 weeks = 603.2 GWh per year
This is roughly equivalent to the annual energy consumption of 55,000 U.S. homes
(based on an average of 10.9 MWh per home per year).

If the electricity comes from fossil fuels (~400 g CO per kWh), then:

603.2 GWh × 400 g/kWh = 241,280 metric tons of CO per year
This is equivalent to the emissions from 52,000 gasoline-powered cars annually.

This is just for chatgpt.

Slashdot Top Deals

Never buy what you do not want because it is cheap; it will be dear to you. -- Thomas Jefferson

Working...