I guess we would be 30 years from stable scalable fusion reactions?

Who cares about fusion? There was a study in the late 90's stating that if only 10% of the capital put towards oil research, exploration, extraction, etc, annually, was put towards renewable energies it would catapult the research output by a factor of 30, by year.

We could have, by now, moved completely towards renewables for everyday life needs and start towards producing more energy we could ever need and put that excess towards greater achievements.

I’ve been cynical about them for years but there’s been enough interesting milestones crossed lately that I wonder if an injection of AI money wouldn’t just do the trick.

Too used to money insulating from reality.

maybe they are bitter because they cant live forever and want to take us out. Make as much money out of us as they can, live lavish life and leave everything in ruins after they are done. If we let them, we deserve it. But i dont think we should let them.

Anyone that can should do at least some act of resistance, even if it feels meaningless. Throwing a fucking rock at datacenter physically affects nothing, but symbolically it has value. Imagine 100 people throwin a rock at datacenter, while still likely doenst do anything it would be big message to everyone else. Though it would likely also result in getting into trouble, so everyone should also do some risk evaluation what they can get away with. But simple graffitti could also be effective or even just plain speaking your mind loudly about things.

And most importantly, what the enemy fears most is our unity. So everyone should definitely do everything they can to improve that. Together we stand, separated we die.

They know that things are going to be shit. They just wasn't the nicest yacht to live on when it does.

See they think they're doing Human Instrumentality from NGE

That they will discover true AGI in their lifetime, and then use it to become a living god.

They'd really love it if we could be dead and making money for them. They live in hope!

Yes, but they also don't care if the grand majority of us are dead.

They have what they need.

That's why most have bunkers.

Fuckerbergs is in Hawaii.

They just want us to make money. They don't give a fuck if you die.

Not really. They are actively trying to circumvent consumers as a step to making money. That is what the entire AI-circlejerk bubble is about.

That's funny because I would prefer them dead and I bet there are more who think like me than there are who think like them. Maybe they should start getting frightened. I'm not saying we should kill them, but I wouldn't bat an eye if they just dropped dead. And I bet not much would be lost for humanity after we sat down and made a plan how to redistribute their wealth and equity.

They still need us to advance AI until it's able to self-improve. That's why they're pumping so much money into scaling. Once they have that, we'll have lost all leverage - that's what their evaluations are based on.

I don't think the current approach can achieve this, but it looks like they'll do their damndest to try. They've already prepared for the worst, and if they can choose between X years before everything goes to shit, or X minus ? years before it goes to shit BUT they get AGI to play with in their bunkers...

You're being sarcastic, right?

There are a few ways to store excess energy generated during the day. Usually batteries are the obvious answer.

One of the great things about batteries is that the metal used in them is recyclable and can be repurposed to make new batteries. So, at some point, we'll barely need to be mining the metals used in those.

Compare that to petroleum products which, if not for green energy, would always needs to be extracting more and more to be able to satisfy an increasing demand of energy.

Can you name a moment in time when regular people did stand in solidarity and revolt against something that wasn’t already at the point of causing them grave, direct, unavoidable, and consistent harm?

"AI data centers are just one of many things contributing to CO2 emisions."

A useful perspective is to reverse how we frame the causative logic here; the fossil fuel industry is contributing to the AI data centre madness. There's a lot of evidence of fossil fuel executives and lobbyists pushing for AI because it helps to justify their existence in a world where renewable energy isn't just cleaner, it's cheaper.

What this means is that we have two problems to solve when it comes to CO2 emissions:

• Humanity's apparent level of dependence on fossil fuels, when accounting for deliberately wasteful endeavours like mega data centres. and
• Humanity's actual level of dependence on fossil fuels. This is higher than it should be and requires some changes to society to improve, but it's not nearly as high as it might seem at a glance.

These are both problems we need to solve, but the method is different for esch

Ok how much is beef farming accountable for

You: "How much will this speed up our doom?"

Your waifu: "Calculating… oh, it's actually less than 1%."

tears in your eyes the Old Yeller soundtrack starts playing

well, they train their AI with pro fossil propaganda as you see in forums like this. in fact, AI searches forums like this and makes summaries to answer questions you might ask it.

The real Roko's Basilisk is that it's disappointed in you and thinks you wasted your life playing with computers.

Man I want your supplier for batteries and panels tbh.

A single DGX B300 that could run Kimi for a few concurrent users, uses 14 kW. Costs about 500k. Assuming you live far enough from the equator to have seasons, you'll have about 8 hours of daytime at the worst points of the year (less at my latitude for an example, we get ~6 hour days in the dead of winter, with sun angles below 10 degrees and sunshine available... not every week)

Even in a slightly less extreme location, You'd be looking at roughly a 100 kW array to fill the battery and power that one server reliably like when there's clouds, about 300 kWh battery capacity to get through long nights. Easily 6 figures total cost, maybe 20-40% of the server itself. This assumes no electricity used for cooling, so it's very much back of the envelope math, reality could be much worse or a tiny bit better depending on your latitude.

I'm exhausted of all this. The data centers have been so pervasive that some communities have been thinking about rationing electricity to get around the requirements. That's... a dystopia future if Ive ever seen one.

Note that the negative impact of these facilities are, by designed, concentrated on the communities that get stuck with them. The overall percentage has to be considered in the context of them focusing that impact into relatively small, super dense footprints.

Also, the percentage is higher than 1%, and in the US is about 5%. This reflects the current situation that the AI companies lament is just too constrained on them, with ambitions of getting to 20% if circumstances allow them to build up the way they want. So it's already somewhat significant, especially with the way it gets concentrated, and further they want to bump it up at least four fold beyond what they've managed to do so far.

In anticipation of that, energy strategies that planned to be more tame and grow by renewables got pushed aside in favor of more natural gas, and especially portable power generation which tends to be more polluting.

One example would be the ai data centers Musk has that he illegally had gas generators installed at. The fine compared to not running them at all is small in comparison to keep them on. This is why it needs to be a percentage or increasing stack of cost not just a small fine every time.

Well that’s one way to speed run environmental catastrophe.