Comment on OpenAI will not disclose GPT-5’s energy use. It could be higher than past models
Bunbury@feddit.nl 1 month agoWhataboutism isn’t useful. Nobody is living the perfect life. Every improvement we can make towards a more sustainable way of living is good. Everyone needs to start somewhere and even if they never move to make more changes at least they made the one.
I disagree.
There’s so much proud ignorance in this world, it’s great to always remind the average person how they’re contributing to problems they don’t even realize.
It’s good to bring their hypocrisy to light, or else they will legitimately go through life thinking that there isn’t a problem.
So when people tell you about the pointing out the positive changes they’ve made you in return like to point out that they still aren’t living up to your standards? I’m not sure that’s the way to go to motivate and inspire people to do better. But you do you I guess.
threeduck@aussie.zone 1 month ago
1 beef burger is equivalent in water consumption to 7.5million chatgpt queries.
iknowitwheniseeit@lemmynsfw.com 1 month ago
Do you have a citation handy for that?
thatcrow@ttrpg.network 1 month ago
If he did, would it change your views on eating meat at all?
iknowitwheniseeit@lemmynsfw.com 1 month ago
Probably not, since I’m a vegan.
Bunbury@feddit.nl 1 month ago
I did a quick calculation and got to around 500 queries per quarter pounder. Lot of guesstimation and rounding though.
Strawberry@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 month ago
The CO2 calculation is also useful and interesting, but they did say “water consumption”
Bunbury@feddit.nl 1 month ago
Fair.
Water use comes out to about 150.000 chatGPT queries per quarter pounder. Using 10ml per prompt and 15.000l per kg of beef.
Still off by many orders of magnitude.
Also that’s just the running costs. If we go into training we’re looking at a comparison the other way around. Training GPT-3 cost Microsoft 700.000 liters of water. So that’s 466.6 quarter pounders.