this post was submitted on 21 May 2025
299 points (96.9% liked)

Technology

70268 readers
4164 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
L4s@hackingne.ws
299
We did the math on AI’s energy footprint. Here’s the story you haven’t heard. (www.technologyreview.com)
submitted 2 days ago by kalkulat@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
146 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Absolutely needed: to get high efficiency for this beast ... as it gets better, we'll become too dependent.

"all of this growth is for a new technology that’s still finding its footing, and in many applications—education, medical advice, legal analysis—might be the wrong tool for the job,,,"

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Jesus_666@lemmy.world 29 points 2 days ago (2 children)

AI usually got better when people realized it wasn't going to do all it was hyped up for but was useful for a certain set of tasks.

Then it turned from world-changing hotness to super boring tech your washing machine uses to fine-tune its washing program.

[–] WanderingThoughts@europe.pub 32 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Like the cliché goes: when it works, we don't call it AI anymore.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The smart move is never calling it "AI" in the first place.

[–] Enkers@sh.itjust.works 9 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Unless you're in comp sci, and AI is a field, not a marketing term. And in that case everyone already knows that's not "it".

[–] frezik@midwest.social 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

The major thing that killed 1960s/70s AI was the Vietnam War. MIT's CSAIL was funded heavily by DARPA. When public opinion turned against Vietnam and Congress started shutting off funding, DARPA wasn't putting money into CSAIL anymore. Congress didn't create an alternative funding path, so the whole thing dried up.

That lab basically created computing as we know it today. It bore fruit, and many companies owe their success to it. There were plenty of promising lines of research still going on.

[–] IsaamoonKHGDT_6143@lemmy.zip 5 points 2 days ago

I wish there was an alternate history forum or novel that explores this scenario.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com -2 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Pretty sure "AI" didn't exist in the 60s/70s either.

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

The perceptron was created in 1957 and a physical model was built a year later

[–] frezik@midwest.social 8 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Yes, it did. Most of the basic research came from there. The first section of the book "Hackers" by Steven Levy is a good intro.