From an efficiency POV it absolutely is significantly better to concentrate compute power in data centers, because when you’re not using it then somebody else can. When those resources are in your private computer, it sits idle most of the time with all it’s potential wasted.
that being said, he can go eat a hot ball of lead. Fuck him for wanting to take away peoples free access to compute power.
And if many people want to use at same time? Less efficient? E waste wise less efficient too. Cooling wise less efficient too as you have to move all cooling tools to one place from many places, the setting has to be perfect too.
And let me tell you that they are not in idle only 18% of time
People can still use any of the Gpu cloud renting stuff/mining to sell their Gpu function so it can still be utilized efficiently. It doesn’t have to be all or nothing.
This isn’t necessarily true. You can have your AI machine doing other things or turn it off when you aren’t using it. It could probably increase efficiency if people were affected by how much energy it uses to write their emails, they might only use it for when they actually need it.
If you have a hammer in your shed, are you depriving your neighbor of a hammer? Your neighbor can get their own hammer, and you’d both be better off than if you had to go rent one from the local hammer monger.
Altman is creating the RAM shortage that he points to as justification for hoarding all the RAM. It’s a circular argument. If he didn’t manufacture scarcity, then everyone would be able to have their own RAM.
He’s the only one in this situation depriving anyone of compute power, and it’s because he wants to rent it all back to them. (Yes, Musk, Zuck, Bezos, and Pichai are guilty here too).
I’m sorry, your first statement is a little wird. If there are actually only enough resources to produce 1 hammer, yes, of course you’re depriving your neighbor of a hammer and it’d be better for both of you to share it.
The rest of your argument is obviously fine, just the first part doesn’t make sense.
What if there are enough resources to produce thousands of hammers, but the hammer monger decided to buy up all the production capacity, thereby creating the scarcity being discussed, and then goes on to say that if you own a hammer, you’re depriving your neighbors?
Let’s agree to disagree. When off, it’s saving power. I used to be one of those that kept my computer on sleep and only turned it off through a restart for upgrades, or to take it apart and clean it. That was me being lazy and giving 0 fucks about resources and the common good. Not anymore.
I recently started putting my new desktop on suspend, after turning my old one into a server that’s on 24/7. Mustn’t keep two computers on at 24/7 now, right?
Yes that precious silicon, the rarest of earthen elements of which we have so little.
And of course the fabrication of semiconducting integrated circuits, which was always in such high demand that prices kept all the peasants from being able to operate any.
Such powers should be reserved for those with superior power and ways of thinking anyway, don’t you agree?
From a hardware utilisation perspective, sure.
There was a time where people only had their devices on for a few hours a day. And you know why no-one cared? Because people could buy as much hardware as they wanted. When supply eventually match demand again, no-one will care again.
It’s way less thermally efficient though… Individual computers in people’s houses running lighter workloads don’t get as hot, and when they do, they don’t need to stay operating for as long: they can just shut down or slow down after the heavy workload, or finish it more slowly. So they don’t need as much cooling, and will produce less waste heat due to the temperature coefficient of resistance.
So they don’t need as much cooling, and will produce less waste heat due to the temperature coefficient of resistance.
And honestly in areas with colder year-round climates, the increase in ambient temps from running locally might actually reduce heating bills because it’s technically doing double duty of doing a job and heating the place.
Isn’t this assuming that we all get unlimited perfect network capacity for free? Most folks have decent connectivity most of the time but moving to a universal thin client model makes a lot of assumptions about our current network infrustructue and our political and financial capacity to improve it. But this out of touch moron hasn’t had to live without multiple redundant commercial quality pipes running to his home and office for decades.
From an efficiency POV it absolutely is significantly better to concentrate compute power in data centers, because when you’re not using it then somebody else can. When those resources are in your private computer, it sits idle most of the time with all it’s potential wasted.
that being said, he can go eat a hot ball of lead. Fuck him for wanting to take away peoples free access to compute power.
And if many people want to use at same time? Less efficient? E waste wise less efficient too. Cooling wise less efficient too as you have to move all cooling tools to one place from many places, the setting has to be perfect too. And let me tell you that they are not in idle only 18% of time
People…dont want access to ai tho…
If it’s too important to squander resources, it’s too important to privatize.
People can still use any of the Gpu cloud renting stuff/mining to sell their Gpu function so it can still be utilized efficiently. It doesn’t have to be all or nothing.
This isn’t necessarily true. You can have your AI machine doing other things or turn it off when you aren’t using it. It could probably increase efficiency if people were affected by how much energy it uses to write their emails, they might only use it for when they actually need it.
when its turned off, the potential is still lost, because it’s not doing anything but the physical resources (the materials) are still spent.
If you have a hammer in your shed, are you depriving your neighbor of a hammer? Your neighbor can get their own hammer, and you’d both be better off than if you had to go rent one from the local hammer monger.
Altman is creating the RAM shortage that he points to as justification for hoarding all the RAM. It’s a circular argument. If he didn’t manufacture scarcity, then everyone would be able to have their own RAM.
He’s the only one in this situation depriving anyone of compute power, and it’s because he wants to rent it all back to them. (Yes, Musk, Zuck, Bezos, and Pichai are guilty here too).
That can apply only to food. Other things mentioned are just stupid. Why we have to use it 100% right now?
I’m sorry, your first statement is a little wird. If there are actually only enough resources to produce 1 hammer, yes, of course you’re depriving your neighbor of a hammer and it’d be better for both of you to share it.
The rest of your argument is obviously fine, just the first part doesn’t make sense.
What if there are enough resources to produce thousands of hammers, but the hammer monger decided to buy up all the production capacity, thereby creating the scarcity being discussed, and then goes on to say that if you own a hammer, you’re depriving your neighbors?
What part of “the rest of the argument is obviously fine” didn’t you understand? :D
Let’s agree to disagree. When off, it’s saving power. I used to be one of those that kept my computer on sleep and only turned it off through a restart for upgrades, or to take it apart and clean it. That was me being lazy and giving 0 fucks about resources and the common good. Not anymore.
I recently started putting my new desktop on suspend, after turning my old one into a server that’s on 24/7. Mustn’t keep two computers on at 24/7 now, right?
Yes that precious silicon, the rarest of earthen elements of which we have so little.
And of course the fabrication of semiconducting integrated circuits, which was always in such high demand that prices kept all the peasants from being able to operate any.
Such powers should be reserved for those with superior power and ways of thinking anyway, don’t you agree?
Are you arguing that advanced chip fabrication is not a limited resource?
It was not before bitcoin and Ai scam. So yes?
From a hardware utilisation perspective, sure. There was a time where people only had their devices on for a few hours a day. And you know why no-one cared? Because people could buy as much hardware as they wanted. When supply eventually match demand again, no-one will care again.
This is completely unrelated, but I hope I’m dead before using “compute” as a noun sounds normal to me.
It’s way less thermally efficient though… Individual computers in people’s houses running lighter workloads don’t get as hot, and when they do, they don’t need to stay operating for as long: they can just shut down or slow down after the heavy workload, or finish it more slowly. So they don’t need as much cooling, and will produce less waste heat due to the temperature coefficient of resistance.
And honestly in areas with colder year-round climates, the increase in ambient temps from running locally might actually reduce heating bills because it’s technically doing double duty of doing a job and heating the place.
I’m gaming a lot. Can confirm, almost no heating bill, but high electricity bill
Literally had mild winters where the computer running could keep a single room comfortably warm.
It’s getting cold in Canada, but playing civ 6 is my version of getting warm by the fire.
Just to introduce another factor: transitioning between hot and cold introduces wear that might be worse that running warm-to-hot constantly.
Isn’t this assuming that we all get unlimited perfect network capacity for free? Most folks have decent connectivity most of the time but moving to a universal thin client model makes a lot of assumptions about our current network infrustructue and our political and financial capacity to improve it. But this out of touch moron hasn’t had to live without multiple redundant commercial quality pipes running to his home and office for decades.