I ABHOR how normalised AI has become on platforms around the World Wide Web
It’s lazy and a ultimatumon effort and autodidatic capacity.
You are actively resorting to waste hydropower energy and drag us into potential water shortage pandemonium just to lobotomized what could’ve been a perfectly good joke.
This is one of the online exertions that treasonous vermin Trump wants you to enact to entail his horrible totalitarian deforestation and greenhouse gas emissions .
Stop appeasing to that oligarch genocide funding clown and his immoral calavry of fascist oppressors who operates utilities that are primarily made to pollute our ecosystem and increase climate change and ocean levels raising.
If I ever see another shitty No-effort AI Picture like this again, I will actively and violently scratch out my eyes with a rusty garden weasel wrapped in mint condition barbed wire and sandpaper the wounded sockets shut so I could never see slop take control of meme subculture.
Is it that sophisticated to edit Trump’s head over a keyboardist’s anatomy?
Anyone know any studies comparing the energy usage of an AI image generator vs manually photo shopping. If a person spends say a half hour on a computer finding a photo and editing it in photoshop to this quality it could cost as much electricity as an image generator.
I think people are starting to overestimate the energy usage of AI while underestimating everything else we do. Like an image like this would take my computer ~30 seconds to generate, meanwhile I’ll use my computer for hours at a time to play games and don’t think much of that.
It would take 30-60 seconds for one image. But the chance of getting the right one is slim. You’d probably generate hundreds, settle on one, then modify that one further. Depending on how precise you want it, it could take over an hour of GPU use. Services that do it online are doing the same thing in the background, maybe generating even more and iterating and evaluating them. All while using many GPUs at once. This isn’t so bad for an image, but videos are way more resource intensive.
I didn’t realize people shut off their computers after having AI do something they might not have otherwise done anyway. Brains, yes. Computers, no.
They do actually. And for the people not running local models, the idea of cloud computing is that once you’re done with it, someone else takes over. If you’re talking about the necessity of it all, sure, but we’re also not exactly advancing the human race by being on Lemmy are we?
Do you have any evidence to support the claim that a computer usage goes down thanks to AI? Maybe some decreasing electricity bills for people who no longer use their computers so much?
ChatGPT has one billion monthly active users, so I’m not sure why you imply offline models are the norm and not the exception btw
Could you edit your comment to make it clearer what “they do, actually” refers to then?
I’m not going to do that, because I hate it when comments get edited in such a way that the whole context changes. However, to clarify: to your reply “I didn’t realize people shut off their computers after having AI do something they might not have otherwise done anyway” I answered that yes, people actually do that. If they run a local model, the model also shuts down. If they don’t run a local model, they can still shut down their computer and the next user can use ChatGPT or whatever online model they use.
Clearly it’s an extremely insignificant number if you can’t back up your belief. Additionally, your language continues to imply local models are as typical as the giant corporate data centers, which you claimed to not wish to imply.