| ▲ | graemep 3 hours ago | |||||||||||||
A view that is not shared always by LLM cheerleaders. Part of Sam Altman's defence of the environmental impact of AI is that it is less than that of a human life. "He said it was unreasonable to focus on "how much energy it takes to train an AI model, relative to how much it costs a human to do one inference query." "It takes like 20 years of life and all of the food you eat during that time before you get smart," he said. "And not only that, it took the very widespread evolution of the 100 billion people that have ever lived and learned not to get eaten by predators and learned how to figure out science and whatever, to produce you." https://www.theregister.com/software/2026/02/23/altman-you-t... | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | Sharlin 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||||||||
His human costume is really starting to fall apart at the seams, isn’t it? | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | devsda 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||||||||
It took a 100 billion people and their knowledge,experience to generate the data to train an AI. So that cost also comes under the environmental costs to build his version of AI. unless he plans to freeze the training data at this point and use that for another billion years, the cost of building AI will always be more than the cost of humanity. | ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||