I bought a datacenter GPU that doesn't fit in a normal motherboard, macgyvered the fan with jumper wires, and now I'm running a model that ties with Claude Sonnet 4.6 on benchmarks, all for £200.
Many, many, many things “consume a lot of power” which is both common and benign. A whirlpool tub “consumes a lot of power” for example. So does an electric stove. And the power can be from any source, such as solar, hydro, or wind.
That’s why I specified there’s minor issues that could be argued about the original data sources. However, that bird has flown the coop. There’s no putting that genie back in the bottle, and no way to undo it. You could argue the company’s responsible owe every single person on the planet some form of restitution, which I do, but I don’t think that qualifies as an ethical concern since it’s universal. No one person was harmed more than another, it was all publicly available data - so the public should benefit from the result. Refusing to use it only hampers yourself, at no detriment to those perceived as wrongdoers.
Right? Yet using AI takes less electricity than that. The concerns are being wildly exaggerated, overblown, and I suspect it’s being done intentionally as a psychological attack on societies to hinder competing nations from faster adoption.
Well, yes and no. Even open source models had to consume a lot of power for the training, including the use of non-owned data
Many, many, many things “consume a lot of power” which is both common and benign. A whirlpool tub “consumes a lot of power” for example. So does an electric stove. And the power can be from any source, such as solar, hydro, or wind.
That’s why I specified there’s minor issues that could be argued about the original data sources. However, that bird has flown the coop. There’s no putting that genie back in the bottle, and no way to undo it. You could argue the company’s responsible owe every single person on the planet some form of restitution, which I do, but I don’t think that qualifies as an ethical concern since it’s universal. No one person was harmed more than another, it was all publicly available data - so the public should benefit from the result. Refusing to use it only hampers yourself, at no detriment to those perceived as wrongdoers.
I rarely see people agonize over the ethics of playing a game on high settings for hours because of the frivolous use of electricity.
Right? Yet using AI takes less electricity than that. The concerns are being wildly exaggerated, overblown, and I suspect it’s being done intentionally as a psychological attack on societies to hinder competing nations from faster adoption.