The ugly truth behind ChatGPT: AI is guzzling resources at planet-eating rates | Mariana Mazzucato
www.theguardian.com
Big tech is playing its part in reaching net zero targets, but its vast new datacentres are run at huge cost to the environment, says economics professor Mariana Mazzucato

Despite its name, the infrastructure used by the “cloud” accounts for more global greenhouse emissions than commercial flights. In 2018, for instance, the 5bn YouTube hits for the viral song Despacito used the same amount of energy it would take to heat 40,000 US homes annually.

Large language models such as ChatGPT are some of the most energy-guzzling technologies of all. Research suggests, for instance, that about 700,000 litres of water could have been used to cool the machines that trained ChatGPT-3 at Microsoft’s data facilities.

Additionally, as these companies aim to reduce their reliance on fossil fuels, they may opt to base their datacentres in regions with cheaper electricity, such as the southern US, potentially exacerbating water consumption issues in drier parts of the world.

Furthermore, while minerals such as lithium and cobalt are most commonly associated with batteries in the motor sector, they are also crucial for the batteries used in datacentres. The extraction process often involves significant water usage and can lead to pollution, undermining water security. The extraction of these minerals are also often linked to human rights violations and poor labour standards. Trying to achieve one climate goal of limiting our dependence on fossil fuels can compromise another goal, of ensuring everyone has a safe and accessible water supply.

Moreover, when significant energy resources are allocated to tech-related endeavours, it can lead to energy shortages for essential needs such as residential power supply. Recent data from the UK shows that the country’s outdated electricity network is holding back affordable housing projects.

In other words, policy needs to be designed not to pick sectors or technologies as “winners”, but to pick the willing by providing support that is conditional on companies moving in the right direction. Making disclosure of environmental practices and impacts a condition for government support could ensure greater transparency and accountability.

  • masterspace@lemmy.caEnglish
    1113·
    6 months ago

    This is absolutely false. GitHub Copilot (and it’s competitors) alone are already actively helping and assisting virtually every software developer around the world, and highly structured coding languages are just the easiest lowest hanging fruit.

    Yes we are heading to a climate disaster because of greed, but that has nothing to do with AI.

    • zepplenzap@lemmy.oneEnglish
      102·
      6 months ago

      I think you are vastly over estimating how many developers are using GitHub Copilot.

      • Fades@lemmy.worldEnglish
        31·
        6 months ago

        That’s bs now and will only become more so with time.

        This was posted two days ago: https://stackoverflow.blog/2024/05/29/developers-get-by-with-a-little-help-from-ai-stack-overflow-knows-code-assistant-pulse-survey-results/

        We found that most of those using code assistant tools report that these assistants are satisfying and easy to use and a majority (but not all) are on teams where half or more of their coworkers are using them, too. These tools may not always be answering queries accurately or solving contextual or overly specific problems, but for those that are adopting these tools into their workflow, code assistants offer a way to increase the quality of time spent working.

        The majority of respondents (76%) let us know they are using or are planning to use AI code assistants. Some roles use these tools more than others amongst professional developers: Academic researchers (87%), AI developers (76%), frontend developers (75%), mobile developers (60%), and data scientists (67%) currently use code assistants the most. Other roles indicated they are using code assistants (or planning to) much less than average: data/business analysts (29%), desktop developers (39%), data engineers (39%), and embedded developers (42%). The nature of these tools lend themselves to work well when trained well; a tool such as GitHub Copilot that is trained on publicly available code most likely will be good at JavaScript for frontend developers and not so good with enterprise and proprietary code scenarios that business analysts and desktop developers face regularly.

        But go ahead, speak for the whole goddamn industry, we’re totally not using AI or AI code-assist!!!

        • zepplenzap@lemmy.oneEnglish
          3·
          6 months ago

          Sorry, I’m not seeing how your source is helping your argument.

          The line I’m responding to is

          “This is absolutely false. GitHub Copilot (and it’s competitors) alone are already actively helping and assisting virtually every software developer around the world.”

          While your source says: "The majority of respondents (76%) let us know they are using or are planning to use AI code assistants. "

          An un scientific survey (aka not random) which it’s self claims the 75% of people who respond used OR ARE PLANNING ON USING (aka, not use it yet), does not equal virtually every developer.

          Also wasn’t stack overflow recently getting bad press for selling content to AI companies? Something that pissed large parts of the developer community? Something that would make developers not happy with AI not take the survey?

          Anyway, have a great day, and enjoy your AI assistant.

      • squeakycatEnglish
        42·
        6 months ago

        It’s also a laundering scheme to make free software proprietary.

    • مهما طال الليل@lemm.eeEnglish
      41·
      6 months ago

      I don’t want to doxx myself or blow my own horn. The programming I do, and many developers do, is not something ChatGPT or Bing AI or whatever it is called can do.

      At best, it is a glorified search engine that can find code snippets and read -but not understand- documentation. Saves you some time but it can’t think and it can’t solve a problem it hasn’t seen before, something programmers often have to do a lot.

      • masterspace@lemmy.caEnglish
        22·
        6 months ago

        Dude, if you’ve never used copilot then shut up and don’t say anything.

        Don’t pretend like you write code that doesn’t benefit from AI assisted autocomplete. Literally all code does. Just capitalization and autocompleting variable names with correct grammar is handy, let alone literally any time there’s boiler plate or repetition.

        Lmao, the idea that you having an NDA makes you work on super elite code that doesn’t benefit from copilot if hilarious. Ive worked on an apps used by hundreds of millions of people and backend systems powering fortune 10 manufacturers, my roommate is doing his PhD on advanced biological modelling and data analysis, copilot is useful when working on all of them.

          • masterspace@lemmy.caEnglish
            11·
            6 months ago

            Oh do tell us again how you haven’t used copilot without saying the words ‘i haven’t used copilot’. Stackoverflow’s professional developer survey found that 70% of devs are using AI assistants, you think none of them have heard of an IDE or Intellisense before?

    • Landless2029@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2·
      6 months ago

      what are the competitors to github’s copilot? I tried it for personal and really like it but can’t use it for work due to IP leak risks.

      I’m hoping there is a self hosted option for it.

      Edit: found one. TabbyML

      • masterspace@lemmy.caEnglish
        1·
        6 months ago

        If capitalism is a forest fire, than the industrial revolution was like hitting a cache of kerosene, computers were like hitting a cache of gasoline, and AI is like hitting a smaller pile of gasoline. Yes it will accelerate things, but that’s it. It’s not causing any new effects we haven’t already seen.