What was the total energy consumption required to acheive this result (both training and running)
And, how much CO2 was released into earths atmosphere?
And, how much CO2 was released into earths atmosphere?
The result is (likely) net energy consumption, resulting in (likely) net CO2 emissions.
So, what was did it cost us for this achievement in AI?
EDIT TO ADD: It's fair to think that such a presser should not include answers to my questions. But, it's also fair to want that level of transparency given we are dealing with climate change.
It's that we are living in a period of time where there are very real consequences of nearly a century of unchecked CO2 due to human industry.
And AI (like crypto before it) requires considerable energy consumption. Because of which, I believe we (people who believe in AI) need to hold companies accountable by very transparently disclosing those energy costs.
And if they do, then what? If it is "too high" do we delay research because we need to keep the world how it is for you? What about all the other problems others face that could be solved by doubling down on compute for AI research?
First, it's keeping the world how it is for all of us, not just me.
Second, to answer you question, I think that is a decision for all of us to weigh in on, but before we can do that, we must be informed as best as we can.
Do sacrifices have to be made for the greater good? Absolutely. Do for-profit mega corporations get to make those decisions without consent from the public? No.
Got a source to support your assertion that many people are okay with the effects of climate change?
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/more-climate-laws...
> Stop trying to pretend your take is the humanitarian take.
That's a straw man. However, I cannot believe many humans are in support of an uninhabitable world.