Comment by windexh8er
3 days ago
I don't buy that - you can't distinguish. This sounds like a convenient way for people to say "my choice is better for the planet" with basically no basis.
Feel free to elaborate.
3 days ago
I don't buy that - you can't distinguish. This sounds like a convenient way for people to say "my choice is better for the planet" with basically no basis.
Feel free to elaborate.
https://sustainability.atmeta.com/blog/2024/10/14/our-approa...
Anthropic: no sustainability goals or claims
OpenAI: no sustainability goals or claims
SpaceX AI: no sustainability goals or claims
Some other non-lab inference providers:
https://regolo.ai/ Eu based, 100% renewables powered
https://greenpt.com/us/sustainability Eu based, allows you to track carbon cost of inference.
Acting like there is no difference between bad things is how you get worse things.
The fact that you believe Meta, of all companies who's gone to great lengths to lie about their core business model, speaks volumes.
This also highlights my point: the norm is that the bulk of the inference and training providers have no goals.
You've moved the goalpost and declared victory my guy. I literally gave you an option, that isn't meta, and is run on renewable energy. The fact that it's hard to get clear information doesn't negate the fact that there are differences, and we should seek to find the best option rather than giving up and accepting whatever bad option is nearest or shiniest.
1 reply →