• 0 Posts
  • 13 Comments
Joined 6 months ago
cake
Cake day: May 19th, 2024

help-circle

  • It is a closed loop, but the paper treats it as if it’s an open loop, and counts all water use for the building, as well as all the water that went into creating any equipment used… and the water that escapes power plants in powering the buildings… it also includes any other buildings that might house related services. Here is the original “study” which is about what maths could be done given the above assumptions:

    http://arxiv.org/pdf/2304.03271

    In short, it has nothing to do with reality, and is more just an attempt at the authors to get their names out there (on bad science that the media is interested in publicizing for click bait reasons).


  • The study that suggests 10-50 interactions with ChatGPT evaporates a whole bottle of water, doesn’t account for the fact that cooling systems are enclosed…

    …and that “study” is based on a bunch of assumptions, which include evaporation from local power plants, as well as the entire buildings GPT’s servers are located in. It does this as if one user is served at a time, and the organizations involved (such as microsoft) do nothing BUT serve one use at a time. So the “study” (which isn’t peer reviewed and never got published) pretends those buildings don’t also serve bing, or windows, or all the other functions microsoft is involved with. It instead assumes whole buildings at microsoft are dedicated to serving just one user of ChatGPT at a time.

    It also includes the manufacture of all the serve and graphics cards equipment, even though the former was used before ChatGPT, and will be used for other things as well… and the latter is only used in training.

    You can check the study out yourself here:

    http://arxiv.org/pdf/2304.03271

    It’s completely junk. Worthless. Even uses a click bait title, and keeps talking about “the secret water foot print” as if it’s uncovering some conspiracy. It’s bunk science.

    P.S It also doesn’t seem to understand that the bulk of GPT’s training was a one time cost, paid in 2021, with one smaller update in 2023.








  • I’m not sure why they tried this.

    ‘We made a VR games headset, but replaced the games with office related programs, like calenders and notepads’

    Did any of them ever use an Oculus Quest? Like, why did they try this? Is this Apple’s Google Glass moment? Did they really think that if you pay enough youtubers to wear it in public, normal people would magically go into car-level debt to emulate them?

    In fact, I’ll go as far as to say this campaign and price point was a bigger mistake, and a louder failure than Google Glasses.