Why can't more journalists reporting on "AI" straightforwardly...

Emily M. Bender (she/her)'s posts Post Back to profile

Why can't more journalists reporting on "AI" straightforwardly say "This is bad, actually"? Case in point: In this article juxtaposing the grandiose claims of OpenAI et al with the massive environmental footprint of LLMs, Goldman still has to include this weird AI optimism:

https://fortune.com/2024/07/12/ai-bizarro-world-agi-electricity-carbon-emissions/

Screencap from linked article, brackets indicate my highlights:
Of course, there is always a certain amount of madness that goes along with developing new technologies. [And the potential for advanced AI systems to help tackle climate change issues]—to predict weather, identify pollution, or improve agriculture, for example—[is real]. In addition, the massive costs of developing and running sophisticated AI models will likely continue to put pressure on companies to make them more energy-efficient.

Still, as Silicon Valley and the rest of California suffer through ever-hotter summers and restricted water use, it seems like sheer lunacy to simply march towards the development of AGI without being equally concerned about data centers guzzling scarce water resources, AI computing power burning excess electricity, and Big Tech companies quietly stepping away from previously touted climate goals. I don’t want Bizarro Superman to guide us toward an AGI future on Bizarro World. I just want a sustainable future on earth—and hopefully, [AI can be a part of it.]

Like 15 July at 13:07 | Open on dair-community.social

12 comments

Emily M. Bender (she/her)

1) Again we see the harm of the term "AI". While there could be some useful applications of machine learning to various climate or materials data in the context of the climate crisis, LLMs (ChatGPT et al) have nothing to do with that.

2) "AI" is bad, actually.

15 July at 13:07 | Open on dair-community.social

mmby

@emilymbender is there any publication basis which tries to delineate the term? I'm reading more in applications, e.g. geometry processing or optics - and all I'm reading are titles referencing concrete methods: neural this, deep that, learning this, transformer that...

15 July at 13:22 | Open on mastodon.social

Emily M. Bender (she/her)

@mmby Here's a couple of resources:

https://medium.com/@emilymenonbender/opening-remarks-on-ai-in-the-workplace-new-crisis-or-longstanding-challenge-eb81d1bee9f

https://www.technologyreview.com/2024/07/10/1094475/what-is-artificial-intelligence-ai-definitive-guide/

15 July at 13:42 | Open on dair-community.social

mmalc

@mmby @emilymbender

https://www.volts.wtf/p/wrapping-our-heads-around-ai-and

15 July at 18:06 | Open on mastodon.social

Kaa :linux:

@emilymbender This is really ridiculous! The paper starts nicely, then, bam, the "AI hype" is back!

15 July at 15:18 | Open on social.sciences.re

Chris Radcliff

@emilymbender “I see, as we all can, that the emperor’s new clothes are very fine. But are they worth the cost? And is the emperor warm enough?”

15 July at 13:19 | Open on spaceup.city

StarkRG

@emilymbender Maybe they're all worried about Roko's basilisk so they're hedging their bets? Of course, hedging one's bets isn't enough for the basilisk, you have to *actively* work *tirelessly* for it, so they might as well just not bother.

15 July at 13:47 | Open on myside-yourside.net

Dr. Eric Janusson

@emilymbender Because GS and others can’t fully believe their own wisdom if they have billions invested in the opposite. They love market churn because it makes them a lotta money.