Comment by otterley
3 hours ago
Well of course not. People still need to process information, just like they need to get around.
Imagine, way back when, when trains were invented, and people kept saying “we should stick with horses and carriages!” or “everyone should walk and carry their load on their bodies!”
You can’t reason about this stuff unless you put it in terms of productivity.
Objections to data centers based on energy and water consumption are red herrings. For the most part, people aren’t saying these things because they actually care about these things. They are objecting because either 1/they don’t want to live right next to a data center, 2/they object to DCs being built without the necessary (and ideally clean) generation capacity being built first, or 3/they fear, dislike, or otherwise object to AI for other reasons and don’t want more AI capacity being built at all.
My reply above highlights the unthinking assumption that data is best processed in a centralized manner that runs roughshod over democratic processes.
Imagine, way back when, before automobiles were adopted, if car manufacturers lobbied for subsidies and bought out all supplies of steel for years in advance with a promise to pay with yet-to-be realized profits rather than compete based on merit.
"terms of productivity" indeed. The inefficient mode of transmutation was chosen because I find slop's value proposition dubious. The merest hint of regulation shakes the industry like a rotten tree.
> The inefficient mode of transmutation was chosen because I find slop's value proposition dubious.
You’re proving my last paragraph. (Also, if you don’t know how to make AI generate good things instead of slop, now is a very crucial time to learn.)
No, my second reply to you was to illustrate the absurdity of the second paragraph of your post to which it replied. If you perceive a flaw in it then it is likely a case of the fox smelling its own hole.
Neither is there any need to sleuth your way to what I "actually" believe. I have already given you the answer.
1 reply →