If you took the time to properly read and comprehend my response you would have noticed I was explicitly responding to what YOU were talking about. At this point however I am going to stop responding since you have yet to actually address anything that I have said without looping back to the same recycled statements.
Yeah AI’s energy usage might look smaller when you compare the numbers to other sectors, but you fail to comprehend that these other sectors like agriculture, industry, etc… are NATURALLY going to take up a much larger percentage of those statistics because they are operating at an immensely larger scale than AI is. The fact that AI can account for even 0.2-0.3% at the incredibly small scale that industry is operating at should speak volumes about how much higher the resource usage is there.
apples and oranges, putting things necessary for human life vs a computer that generates me brainrot roblox games in the same sentence is an insane take
I can’t wait for the day the bubble bursts on all the useless overhyped AI “tool” attempts and companies start pivoting towards uses of AI that actually bring great benefits to everyone.
Top Roblox Developers already create games in 7 days. I don’t see any top Roblox developers going against this either.
I played his game again recently, checked roblox group, and turns out he created “Wild West” - which were able to reach 400M visits, and a popular game I’ve also enjoyed back 2019 or 2020. A lot more other top Roblox developers, you see in front page, who’s been making games as quick as 14-30 days have also found this innovation quite amazing. Not even the top 100’s.
I am merely deploying a technology and sharing the cumulated gatekept workflow top developers already have, and automating it with AI, that will be there sooner or later. This, of course, comes with another new free gamified learning platform as with our initiatives. A free gamified learning platform that teaches the fundamentals of Roblox game development in a short, impactful and gamified way that truly lets even every average Roblox players to learn how to think systematically.
I don’t see any good use with this tool that’s basically “Roblox game generator” If the user does not have proper knowledge they would basically make low quality - slops games.
This is my point.
I’m sure everyone encourages people to create something, a game, a place they liked. with pure imaginations.
There’s assistance that’s existed within Roblox Studio, Roblox Assistance website.
At least with those things still makes you learn stuff more quickly than browsing through 100 pages of documentations.
And with this tool, We can bet the users are just bad actors.
the people who simply wants to make quick money off of children. Further ruining Roblox’s aesthetic and motto “Powering imagination.”
Please don’t fuel the problems that’s already existed within the community.
This is irrelevant when all the apps, technology, and tools you use today contribute to climate change. It’s a silly argument to complain about one type of climate change, while simultaneously using multitude of other technology that contributes to climate change. It’s either stop support of all non essential services (games , social media, etc) , or just become a hypocrite complaining about climate change, while also contributing to it.
Your original response was making the false equivalence that conventional computing technology was equally as impactful as AI to climate change, which I clarified was completely incorrect and linked to resources proving how much worse of an impact it has.
The conventional computing technology we currently use today that any decent AI models are incapable of running on does not even remotely come close to how bad an AI datacenter’s resource usage is in comparison.
If you’re not gonna take the time to properly read through my post then don’t even bother responding.
Enel (Europe’s largest energy company) serves over 61 million customers and operates 88 GW of generating capacity.
OpenAI: 700 million weekly active users for ChatGPT
Even if AI shows up as 0.2–0.3% of global electricity (which is clearly not just OpenAI), that’s still minuscule compared to utilities like Enel (which is clearly not just the energy company), even per user, OpenAI consumes thousands of times less energy, proving current alarmism is misplaced. It’s overhyped, overstated.
Electricity doesn’t care whether it powers food storage, people’s residential home, or ChatGPT, what matters is grid impact, and on that scale AI is still far smaller than things we accept daily, like streaming video or Netflix.
necessity doesn’t change the physics of the grid. If critics are worried about impact, then streaming video, gaming, or always-on devices should be targeted first, since they dwarf AI by comparison and are also “optional.”
1 hour of netflix streaming (per user) = a few hundred watt hours of energy
1 chat gpt query = 2-10 watt hours of energy (or more depending on complexity of the query)
put those numbers into perspective, and assume someone spends a few hours using your vibe coding tool and you might aswell be more energy efficient watching a youtube video on how to code on roblox
its disappointing to see you refusing to face a real issue thats being presented and instead proceeding to gaslight all of us.
AI requires fresh computation on each query, streaming platforms serve you ready to go, optimized content on your device
Streaming, video, gaming, etc… can all be mitigated with the pushes to switch to renewables. AI’s alarming consumption of tons of water is much more concerning because that’s not a problem which could immediately be solved now and it’s already at an alarmingly high number when you look at how small AI’s scale currently is.
Now will you actually address anything I’ve said without rewording the same recycled statement in a slightly different fashion?
CORRECTION: 40-800 Wh for netflix per hour*** CORRECTION: 0.3-0.34 Wh per ChatGPT query***
and 20-40 Wh per 1 hour of ChatGPT for power users
So in fact, using ChatGPT more allows you to learn more while consuming less electricity than watching a one-hour movie on Netflix per user.
I’m just stating facts, people are misinformed and exaggerating AI’s energy consumption. Yes, it contributes to CO2 emissions, but so does everything we already use in daily life. Unlike watching a movie, AI adds more value by helping users gain knowledge faster than ever.
which is the same for AI? Renewable energy is definitely the future.
Taken together, my updated analysis suggests that streaming a Netflix video in 2019 typically consumed around 0.077 kWh (77 Wh) of electricity per hour […] The results are highly sensitive to the choice of viewing device, type of network connection and resolution, as shown in the chart, below right.
We find that typical ChatGPT queries using GPT-4o likely consume roughly 0.3 watt-hours
Note that for heavier work and/or working with codebases (or using reasoning models), the energy cost increases significantly as the input tokens scale, so it probably falls somewhere around the 10-20 Wh per prompt.
Another source states:
Training the GPT-4 model, with over a trillion parameters, consumed some 62.3 GWh of electricity over 100 days.
This is very expensive compared to simple video compression algorithms that run on the data centers, if you want to find a comparable example for video streaming.
And this is not including the modern TV which consumed averaging 150 Wh per hour, totaling to 227 Wh per hour if combined with streaming on Netflix.
As my point stands, AI is a new innovation and it is just so overemphasized. If fact-checked, every tech is already consuming far more.
GPT-4 model is old news. A lot has changed since 2023. Training a model now is becoming less and less expensive now as efficiency and innovations are being made. New techniques have launched to efficiently train a model with just 1% of original cost too.
Nope, today’s everyday tech still out matches AI usage. Average usage of a cell phone per day by an adult is 6 hours, AI is a fraction of that if the person even uses it. AI data centers are accountable for about 3 percent of global electricity, while e-waste from everyday usage (phones, games, etc) are over 20. Im not sure how else to explain this to you, this information is all available online, you can’t complain about AI when you use the multitude of other contributions to e-waste that isnt a life necessity. All the information is provided by global studies from the UN and other reputable resources. Please do your research. I am also going to block further notifications from you, I understand a lot of you are young and dont have a great understanding of things, but I am not going to keep arguing with someone who cant do a simple search. Goodbye
They released with notably lower token pricing due to this, proving efficiency is becoming more and more possible.
Any reports saying it’s much higher is speculative and is based on “estimates” only. NVIDIA’s B200 is now even more cost-effective in its consumption while providing faster speed. Which slashes up to 25x in energy costs compared to older platforms.
Exactly, which means the incremental cost of using AI is tiny compared to what someone’s gaming PC already eats up. Running high-end PC cost around 500W for an hour, but an AI chat is closer to the cost of streaming a TikTok. The baseline power is already being spent, AI just adds huge value on top of that with almost no extra energy.
So overrated, concerns can be there but it’s just often highly exaggerated like most new technology innovation.
The link you sent doesn’t work by the way, it tells me to subscribe to read the article.
Anyways, this conversation has exhausted me and I said everything I had to say. If you still think you’d rather contribute to this mess rather than pay 5$ for someone’s coding course then you do you I don’t know what to tell you. Just remember that:
What have you done to combat climate change? Did you donate? Did you contribute into the making of sustainable energy utilities? Look at Germany and other “Green” Parties in Europe, they promise better environment and to combat climate change and yet have to do anything besides “investing” in millions to Sub-Saharan countries or Middle Eastern countries for them to do the climate combat.
This is an ignorant response. Yeah, I don’t have a car. I use public transport or just walk. I take smart choices in my life that are also good for the planet. What else do you expect me to do?
