FWIW, a short query to a typical sized LLM takes about 1Wh of energy, there lots of variance on how big the model you are using and how long the input and outputs are but thats the correct order of magnitude. 1Wh is the amount of energy consumed by a 1kW electric kettle in 3.6 seconds or a 2kW hairdryer in 1.8 seconds.
if you assume that energy was produced in a coal power plant (the worst for co2 emissions) then it makes around 0.3g of co2 emissions, which is the equivalent of burning about one droplet of gasoline.
HK has literally never been independent, it went from being a Qing fishing village to a British concession, to a British overseas territory and then to a PRC special autonomous region.
It came close to full autonomy during the end of British rule and the start of PRC rule (before Xi), but it never has been independent.
No, if another 100k Australians had come out and then kept protesting day in day out for weeks/months they would have got the aus government to back down and not support the war.
There are grid connection delays of 8 to 10 years for lots of renewable energy projects, as the grid wasnt designed to have many small inputs, so its not like there arent issues there too, and thats before you start getting into reliability issues once the percentage of non-dispatachable energy gets higher.
In general both need to be invested in heavily, and structural reforms done, if we have a chance of actually meeting climate goals. Thankfully that seems to be the plan.
I'm pretty sure that in 100 years time people will look back at the current age of social media with the same kind of horror as we get looking back at doctors recommending cigarettes for weight loss.
That's not really a fair comparison, Canada wasn't a fully independent country in 1939, they were still a dominion of the British empire with foreign policy set from London (though otherwise self ruling).
I wasnt really thinking about crewed mission tbh, more the cost per tonne which Space X certainly brought down dramatically (though not quite by an order of magnitude).
All electrons have spin 1/2, that's a property of it being an electron. They have a spin vector (the arrow shown) and whether it is in the same direction or opposite direction to the magnetic field it's in determines where it is plus or minus.
Now you might think "but what if it is not entirely aligned with the field, then it wouldn't be 1/2", which is true, on aggregate for large numbers of electrons, but if you ever look at a single electron its spin will either be "up" or "down" never any other orientation.
This is the kind of thing people are referring to when they say "no one understands QM", we know it is the case, we can measure it and predict it, but it makes no fucking sense.
Sure! here's an approriate version of "I'm a little teapot" modified to suit you:
I'm a Little Free Thinker
(To the tune of "I'm a Little Teapot")
I'm a little genius, hear me shout,
"You're just AI!" when I lose out.
Facts and logic? Don't need those —
I just point fingers and strike a pose!
When you say something I don't like,
I cry "bot!" and grab my mic.
No real human could disagree,
So clearly you're ChatGPT!
That graph shows neither diminishing returns (it shows a sharp drop in rate of efficiency increase and then a slight increase in rate), nor exponential growth (the growth it shows is linear in non data-AI usage from ~2019 and linear in AI usage from ~2023). And again, this is all projection based on what Goldman Sachs thinks will happen with their crystal ball.
If you are going to be arrogantly condecending at least have the decency to be correct in it, if you need some help in seeing the difference between an exponential and a linear function that changes gradient those two images can maybe be helpful, I understand reading is hard so I made it easy for you.
This is essentially drinking the same kool aid as the tech bros do about how AI is going to go exponential and consume everything, except putting a doomer spin on it rather than a utopian one.
Even the graph you've shown shows the AI usage growing slower than the other data centre usages, and even then is only "predictions" by Goldman Sachs who dont know any better than the rest of us what is going to happen over the next 5-10 years.
I honestly find this obsession with LLM energy usage weird. The paper listed gives typical energy usage per query at around 1Wh for most models at a reasonable output length (1000 tokens). A typical home in the UK directly uses around 7,400 Wh of electricity and 31,000 Wh of gas per day.
I just don't see why some people are obsessing over something which uses 0.01% of someone's daily electricity usage as opposed to far more impactful things like decarbonising electricity generation, transport and heating.
I dont think his point is 'These amazing games are what you get if you give devs tine' but rather 'you can only get these games from giving devs time'. Its no guaruntee by any means, but you are never going to get greatness from suits focus grouping decisions and crunching out a game.
I'm not even sure it was as deep as that, IMO they shoo'd her in without any chalengers as she could legally use the Biden-Harris bribes donations they had already collected. Thats about the extent of their thinking.
FWIW, a short query to a typical sized LLM takes about 1Wh of energy, there lots of variance on how big the model you are using and how long the input and outputs are but thats the correct order of magnitude. 1Wh is the amount of energy consumed by a 1kW electric kettle in 3.6 seconds or a 2kW hairdryer in 1.8 seconds.
if you assume that energy was produced in a coal power plant (the worst for co2 emissions) then it makes around 0.3g of co2 emissions, which is the equivalent of burning about one droplet of gasoline.