Which is only ever done once. Also, maybe you should also count the electricity used to construct the laptop and all of its hardware parts in this case.
Comment on Why using ChatGPT is not bad for the environment
socphoenix@midwest.social 1 day ago*as long as we don’t count the shit load of electricity spent training the model.
hisao@ani.social 1 day ago
socphoenix@midwest.social 1 day ago
They only raise beef once too unless you’re pretending there only one ai model ever trained you’re purposefully trying to create a false narrative.
hisao@ani.social 1 day ago
You’re being a sophist by comparing those. It’s non-comparable type of periodicity. AI doesn’t need continuous training to function. In theory, eveyone could just stop and settle on models we have already and they would continue to work forever. Training models is only needed for creating better improved models. And you can count really big models like ChatGPT ones on fingers. You can’t raise beef once and keep people fed forever. Raising beef has the same type of periodicity as running already-trained model, something that is continuously done for industry to function.
socphoenix@midwest.social 1 day ago
Could yes but they are definitely training new ai’s. So same as I’ve cut most meats out of my diet I’ll do the same with ai and talk loudly about how catastrophic their water and electricity usage is until it’s no longer true. Both are not good for the environment and both are completely unnecessary to our survival.
AnonomousWolf@lemmy.world 1 day ago
It’s already included in the 3Wh calculation