this post was submitted on 24 Jun 2024
1699 points (96.9% liked)
People Twitter
5023 readers
1680 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a tweet or similar
- No bullying.
- Be excellent to each other.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You sound very angry and defensive. And you will continue to do so after evidence shows that AI has had a negative impact on the environment. On the bright side, the end of humanity will mean that people being angry and defensive won't exist either, which will be nice.
AI has a negative impact on the environment today (because of energy use) but it could also result in breakthroughs in battery and power generation technology that enable us to overcome our energy problems. It's already having a huge impact with things like medicine and was a key component in recent advancements in fusion reactor design (which would be the thing that saves us from our energy problems).
It's not all LLM and image generation.
If the last 20 years has taught us anything, I think it should be to hold back on assuming that technology makes the world better without significant drawbacks.
Angry and defensive? Sounds like they are saying AI is ten times less efficient than what we've already built but they are fine with that because of the convenience the new tool offers them. They seem like they are attempting humor more than expressing anger to me.
Ha, yes, "bullshit alarmist prop" truly is a very funny phrase!
I bet they consider it funny.
The environmental impact is interesting, if an AI search being as environmentally impactful as 10 Google searches is true.
I don't know about you, but it often takes a number of Google searches for me to find the right information, whereas with AI and Google combined I usually get the info I need in 1/2 Google searches.
That means that, based on my personal experience, AI is probably more environmentally efficient at getting me the correct info than google search alone.
Edit: gotta love downvoters that give no discussion. I'm happy to re-evaluate the above but if nobody is rebuking it then all I can assume is that downvoters are 'AI BAD' folks who don't have any intelligent input.
The ai results from Google I have been getting are less helpful than two specific searches. It could be because of how we search for things and it is definitely getting messed with because of seo weighting and ai targeting those tools, so I think a better option would be to teach people how to actually use the search engines properly instead of just sitting back and letting ais pick up slack.
My scenario is that I use chatgpt to get context and terminology in the area I'm researching.
I then know how to do more specific Google searches (only 1/2).
So effectively 11-12 searches vs 2.
I guess it adds up to 12 searches worth of environmental impact with chatgpt+Google (10 searches worth from chatgpt, 2 from Google)
When I use Google alone it's often the same as that if not more. Sometimes it's less if I already know the subject matter, but in those scenarios I would usually give just Google a go first anyway.
Basically chatgpt often either gives me the answer or a much better starting place for what to Google.
I don't understand the chatgpt bit still. When you say you need more context on the subject matter, you could search for the wiki or a forum and get the same information chatgpt is pulling without the impact.
True, depending on the quality of the wiki/forum. I would then also often find myself defaulting back to Google to find the right page on the wiki/forum, just with the name of the forum included to narrow down my search.
That or I'd never find the exact bit of info I need because it's buried in hours worth of reading on the wiki.
Try using the duckduckgo search engine. I switched recently and the search results are way better than Google now. I get what I'm looking for first try more often than not.
I have the opposite issue with DDG and it's been my default search engine for a year now. I frequently have to try bing or Google or cheat and just use reddit for specific info just like I did with Google.
DDG is terrible at indexing certain info though and really only hits some of the biggest sites.
Trying to vaguely search for stuff is an absolute crapshoot on DDG.
That's interesting, I've been having way better luck digging around on ddg. Google just seems to serve up ads when I'm trying to research a company or something and won't give me what I'm looking for.
Maybe its the types of things I search for though. It's really hard to say
I think a large part of it is whether you know what you're searching for already. If you have a good idea of what it is already then you can generally find it. If you're already good at using search terms or syntax it's always helpful but it was the same for Google.
Simply put though Google just scrapes waaaaaaay more data so it's going to have more to index from.
Either way it's just one tool. Just like I'm using Bing for porn over either lol.
https://duckduckgo.com/duckduckgo-help-pages/results/syntax/
DDG is bing though, is it not?
That does not sound angry in the slightest.
How about instead of strawmanning their emotional state, why don't you be a better person?
Agreed, there is no sound, because this medium is purely text-based, so we have limited information. This is why saying things like "be a better person" can come off as silly.