I think the article’s point is still valid in regards to “AI datacenter megaprojects”. Is this new and unique for AI, or simply a continuation of the huge build-out for other demands, like video streaming? Is it “unfair” to target AI for that when video streaming apparently dwarfs AI in terms of energy usage?
I think AI replacing workers is great (in an ideal world). I’m coming at it from the Fully Automated Luxury Gay Space Communism angle, and saying “AI bad because it’s replacing workers” seems wrong to me, vs “Privatization of AI and economic inequality are bad”. The genie isn’t going back into the bottle, so let’s take on the fight that can be won.
I’m not against automation of jobs either. I’m against automation of jobs under capitalism, especially when said automation is controlled by the capitalists and jobs are still required to live, and there aren’t suitable replacements waiting to be filled that pay enough. Capital will let us starve to drive up quarterly profits an extra 0.1% before it concedes that the economy is supposed to serve the people and not the other way around.
My concern is that these tools are powerful enough that, through the miasma of low-effort propaganda they can create, the most powerful models will be used by the powers that be to retain their chokehold. Infinite cheap digital labor if you own a nuclear power plant isn’t going to empower the working class under the current organization of things. It’s going to be used to further entrench what already exists. Blanket deployments of AI to scour everything on the Internet which presents a threat to capital and send goons to deal with the people producing it. It doesn’t matter if it’s a blunt force tool with false-positives if it gets the intended target in the process. That’s the American way after all! What’s the solution? A home-brewed miasma of pro-communist propaganda, hosted on guerilla mesh networks connected over TOR?
How do we win this fight? If we are obsolete in the process of making the money go round, and there’s enough domestic military boots in the form of Police (and police drones) to deal with us stepping out of line, we can simply be ignored. Like I don’t think it’s impossible to achieve, but I think as time goes on, the more power-serving automation exists, the smaller that windows of opportunity shrinks until it’s effectively gone.
I do think video streaming is a problem. I would honestly be ok returning to a world where 480p or even 360p streams are the norm because these bandwidths are insane. Unfortunately YouTube by default won’t even let you do that! They’d rather incur the extra cost to try and upsell audio-only on music and podcasts as a premium feature. Offline downloads are another great way to save bandwidth for repeat watches/listens but that is not available either in lieu of monetizing always-online, on-demand streaming services. Perhaps if bandwidth and electricity become much more scarce in the imperial core this will change, but I do not know if/when that would be the case.
Back on water use, there’s a pretty valid case by Hank Green I saw about AI where, in terms of water usage, it’s a little silly to go after it when even its predictions on water use in the medium term are a fraction of what the US corn farming requires right now. It’s subsidized, has been for decades, and it’s been shoehorned into everything just to keep corn farmers having jobs farming corn. One of the biggest uses of the stuff is literally just to feed cattle to produce one of the least thermodynamically-efficient foods possible (let alone the ethical issues of meat consumption).
I think the article’s point is still valid in regards to “AI datacenter megaprojects”. Is this new and unique for AI, or simply a continuation of the huge build-out for other demands, like video streaming? Is it “unfair” to target AI for that when video streaming apparently dwarfs AI in terms of energy usage?
I think AI replacing workers is great (in an ideal world). I’m coming at it from the Fully Automated Luxury Gay Space Communism angle, and saying “AI bad because it’s replacing workers” seems wrong to me, vs “Privatization of AI and economic inequality are bad”. The genie isn’t going back into the bottle, so let’s take on the fight that can be won.
I’m not against automation of jobs either. I’m against automation of jobs under capitalism, especially when said automation is controlled by the capitalists and jobs are still required to live, and there aren’t suitable replacements waiting to be filled that pay enough. Capital will let us starve to drive up quarterly profits an extra 0.1% before it concedes that the economy is supposed to serve the people and not the other way around.
My concern is that these tools are powerful enough that, through the miasma of low-effort propaganda they can create, the most powerful models will be used by the powers that be to retain their chokehold. Infinite cheap digital labor if you own a nuclear power plant isn’t going to empower the working class under the current organization of things. It’s going to be used to further entrench what already exists. Blanket deployments of AI to scour everything on the Internet which presents a threat to capital and send goons to deal with the people producing it. It doesn’t matter if it’s a blunt force tool with false-positives if it gets the intended target in the process. That’s the American way after all! What’s the solution? A home-brewed miasma of pro-communist propaganda, hosted on guerilla mesh networks connected over TOR?
How do we win this fight? If we are obsolete in the process of making the money go round, and there’s enough domestic military boots in the form of Police (and police drones) to deal with us stepping out of line, we can simply be ignored. Like I don’t think it’s impossible to achieve, but I think as time goes on, the more power-serving automation exists, the smaller that windows of opportunity shrinks until it’s effectively gone.
I do think video streaming is a problem. I would honestly be ok returning to a world where 480p or even 360p streams are the norm because these bandwidths are insane. Unfortunately YouTube by default won’t even let you do that! They’d rather incur the extra cost to try and upsell audio-only on music and podcasts as a premium feature. Offline downloads are another great way to save bandwidth for repeat watches/listens but that is not available either in lieu of monetizing always-online, on-demand streaming services. Perhaps if bandwidth and electricity become much more scarce in the imperial core this will change, but I do not know if/when that would be the case.
Back on water use, there’s a pretty valid case by Hank Green I saw about AI where, in terms of water usage, it’s a little silly to go after it when even its predictions on water use in the medium term are a fraction of what the US corn farming requires right now. It’s subsidized, has been for decades, and it’s been shoehorned into everything just to keep corn farmers having jobs farming corn. One of the biggest uses of the stuff is literally just to feed cattle to produce one of the least thermodynamically-efficient foods possible (let alone the ethical issues of meat consumption).