From a long term environmental standpoint that’s not at all clear cut.
We objectively have too many humans in our biosphere for our current rate of resource consumption and we should significantly drop the overall number.
However, our current standard of living is mostly the result of a shared economy where we pool and share our resources and have a shit ton of people working.
Right now neural network algorithms consume a lot of processing power and resources, but they also solve whole new classes of automations problems that computers haven’t been able to solve before.
If we actually want to maintain our standard of living and reduce the population size, we may very well need AI automation utilities. They can keep scaling down in size and power consumption in the way that a real human can’t.
We can support the current population, it’s just not profitable or popular to do so.
Birthrates naturally level off as societies develop. Many are already seeing negative growth.
Our current standard of living is mostly predicated on offshoring the suffering and waste to the global South, but even that could be comfortably leveled off if we weren’t living under Capitalism.
We don’t need large AI farms, we need empathy. The techbros will not save us.
We can support the current population, it’s just not profitable or popular to do so.
If your solution ignores the nature of human psychology it’s not a solution, it’s a quixotic quest.
Our current standard of living is mostly predicated on offshoring the suffering and waste to the global South, but even that could be comfortably leveled off if we weren’t living under Capitalism.
Yes, and as their standard of living rises to meet ours, the whole human output becomes increasingly unsustainable.
We don’t need large AI farms, we need empathy. The techbros will not save us.
There is a more plausible path for neural networks to be involved in climate change solutions then their is for you to replace capitalism.
my brother in christ what are you saying? you know that rich people are the biggest polluters?
you know how ai datacenters literally destroy our planet? and for what? these supposed automation tasks will not serve us. we will have mass poverty and more wealth concentrated into the hands of a habdful of tech bros. it’s the industrial revolution all over again.
the global south is suffering from our actions. and how do you define living standards? do you think a capital slave that works in deadly conditions will be happy becase now they have an iphone and access to electricity? No. a slave is still a slave.
I’m sure that if AI could get to the state where it could even approach maybe doing those things, it will mesh very well with capitalism and we’d all benefit collectively. One of the core tenants of capitalism.
Surplus value cannot be extracted from technology? I guess if you mean directly.
Every technological advancement has been used to to create more value that workers produce that gets stolen by the owner class, so through the transitive property, 100% percent of the value created by technology is stolen from the people actually using the technology to produce the value.
We’ve had insane technology breakthroughs that have made the value we produce skyrocket, and we’re in the negative, by a shit ton.
Also those data centers would be classified under “means of production” and in an actual socialistic or communistic economy would be under the control of the people and would then produce value for us.
They’re the ecofascist yet you’re the one saying “you’ll shit in the mud and you’ll like it”.
Birthrates lower partially thanks to higher standard of living, which are not sustainable for 7+ billions people.
Not that I think LLMs are going to help in any way, but every time someone mentions overpopulation, all the counter arguments I see are loads of anti system rhetoric with nothing to show for it.
You think soviet Russia was/current China is sustainable?
The earth can easily sustain our current population at a 1st world standard of living, but only if we are orders of magnitude more efficient. That means things like no mass car usage, eco-urbanisn, no more single family homes with quarter acre empty lawns, widespread plant-based foods as the norm, and repairable technology that actually lasts decades instead of planned obsolescence and cheap plastic junk that fills up landfills.
You don’t need to be some anarcho-primitivist/Ted Kaczynski wannabe living in a wooden shack with one set of clothes.
Now is that viable in the current societal climate? No, people, especially Americans generally hate much of those eco-urbanist ideas. As long as Capitalism is the default economic system and neo-liberal politics is the default political approach to democracy, we will continue marching towards a consumerist doom.
If we actually want to maintain our standard of living and reduce the population size, we may very well need AI automation utilities. They can keep scaling down in size and power consumption in the way that a real human can’t.
Theoreticisizing LLM’s usefulness and resourcefulness doesn’t help you there. For now they are rather useless embaracingly inefficient resoucehogs existing purely because of the bubble. It’s a gamble at best, or a waste of resources and a degradation of human workforce at worst.
AI is not just LLMs, and it’s already revolutionized biotechnical engineering through things like alpha fold. Like I said, “AI”, as in neural network algorithms of which LLMs are just one example, are literally solving entirely new classes of problems that we simply could not solve before.
I don’t have to dream, DeepMind literally won the Nobel prize last year. My best friend did his PhD in protein crystallography and it took him 6 years to predict the structure of a single protein underlying legionnaires disease. He’s now at MIT and just watched DeepMind predict hundreds of thousands of them in a year.
If you vet your news sources by only listening to ones that are anti-AI then you’re going to miss the actual exciting advancements lurking beneath the oceans of tech bro hype.
The ones advocating for corporate greed and AI are the same ones talking about a birth rate crisis. I guess they just want more proles to slave for them and damn the ones who die young in the process.
Edit: Wow. Folks really can’t take a joke!
The people can stay, it is the AI that has to go.
Nah people are terrible . Have you seen lemmy?
Your image didn’t display for me in voyager app
From a long term environmental standpoint that’s not at all clear cut.
We objectively have too many humans in our biosphere for our current rate of resource consumption and we should significantly drop the overall number.
However, our current standard of living is mostly the result of a shared economy where we pool and share our resources and have a shit ton of people working.
Right now neural network algorithms consume a lot of processing power and resources, but they also solve whole new classes of automations problems that computers haven’t been able to solve before.
If we actually want to maintain our standard of living and reduce the population size, we may very well need AI automation utilities. They can keep scaling down in size and power consumption in the way that a real human can’t.
Stop this ecofascist shit.
We can support the current population, it’s just not profitable or popular to do so.
Birthrates naturally level off as societies develop. Many are already seeing negative growth.
Our current standard of living is mostly predicated on offshoring the suffering and waste to the global South, but even that could be comfortably leveled off if we weren’t living under Capitalism.
We don’t need large AI farms, we need empathy. The techbros will not save us.
If your solution ignores the nature of human psychology it’s not a solution, it’s a quixotic quest.
Yes, and as their standard of living rises to meet ours, the whole human output becomes increasingly unsustainable.
There is a more plausible path for neural networks to be involved in climate change solutions then their is for you to replace capitalism.
my brother in christ what are you saying? you know that rich people are the biggest polluters?
you know how ai datacenters literally destroy our planet? and for what? these supposed automation tasks will not serve us. we will have mass poverty and more wealth concentrated into the hands of a habdful of tech bros. it’s the industrial revolution all over again.
the global south is suffering from our actions. and how do you define living standards? do you think a capital slave that works in deadly conditions will be happy becase now they have an iphone and access to electricity? No. a slave is still a slave.
Lmao no
I’m sure that if AI could get to the state where it could even approach maybe doing those things, it will mesh very well with capitalism and we’d all benefit collectively. One of the core tenants of capitalism.
I hope someone drops you on your head again
capitalism works by extracting surplus value from workers so the owner class can have it.
surplus value can’t be extracted from technology, it can only make workers more efficient cost for cost.
we don’t own the datacenters, therefore it won’t ever be making value to us.
Surplus value cannot be extracted from technology? I guess if you mean directly.
Every technological advancement has been used to to create more value that workers produce that gets stolen by the owner class, so through the transitive property, 100% percent of the value created by technology is stolen from the people actually using the technology to produce the value.
We’ve had insane technology breakthroughs that have made the value we produce skyrocket, and we’re in the negative, by a shit ton.
Also those data centers would be classified under “means of production” and in an actual socialistic or communistic economy would be under the control of the people and would then produce value for us.
i literally said this.
They’re the ecofascist yet you’re the one saying “you’ll shit in the mud and you’ll like it”.
Birthrates lower partially thanks to higher standard of living, which are not sustainable for 7+ billions people.
Not that I think LLMs are going to help in any way, but every time someone mentions overpopulation, all the counter arguments I see are loads of anti system rhetoric with nothing to show for it.
You think soviet Russia was/current China is sustainable?
The earth can easily sustain our current population at a 1st world standard of living, but only if we are orders of magnitude more efficient. That means things like no mass car usage, eco-urbanisn, no more single family homes with quarter acre empty lawns, widespread plant-based foods as the norm, and repairable technology that actually lasts decades instead of planned obsolescence and cheap plastic junk that fills up landfills.
You don’t need to be some anarcho-primitivist/Ted Kaczynski wannabe living in a wooden shack with one set of clothes.
Now is that viable in the current societal climate? No, people, especially Americans generally hate much of those eco-urbanist ideas. As long as Capitalism is the default economic system and neo-liberal politics is the default political approach to democracy, we will continue marching towards a consumerist doom.
Theoreticisizing LLM’s usefulness and resourcefulness doesn’t help you there. For now they are rather useless embaracingly inefficient resoucehogs existing purely because of the bubble. It’s a gamble at best, or a waste of resources and a degradation of human workforce at worst.
AI is not just LLMs, and it’s already revolutionized biotechnical engineering through things like alpha fold. Like I said, “AI”, as in neural network algorithms of which LLMs are just one example, are literally solving entirely new classes of problems that we simply could not solve before.
lol keep dreaming :)
https://arstechnica.com/science/2024/10/protein-structure-and-design-software-gets-the-chemistry-nobel/
I don’t have to dream, DeepMind literally won the Nobel prize last year. My best friend did his PhD in protein crystallography and it took him 6 years to predict the structure of a single protein underlying legionnaires disease. He’s now at MIT and just watched DeepMind predict hundreds of thousands of them in a year.
If you vet your news sources by only listening to ones that are anti-AI then you’re going to miss the actual exciting advancements lurking beneath the oceans of tech bro hype.
just passing by to point out the nobel prize is political, not meritocratic.
This is false, it’s not a binary system. The prize is both.
The ones advocating for corporate greed and AI are the same ones talking about a birth rate crisis. I guess they just want more proles to slave for them and damn the ones who die young in the process.
Fuck this timeline