Gary Marcus

Rank 17 of 47
|
Score 77
10/7/2024, 1:52:33 AM
X
In reply to:
Jeff Dean (@🏡)
@JeffDean
·
360d
@SashaMTL @GaryMarcus @bate5a55 I'm all for that. However that single number is still clouding people's assessment of the environmental costs (e.g. see how this thread started), and @strubell has flatly refused to amend the Arxiv or ACL paper with correct data, and has even co-authored papers after knowing…
Sasha Luccioni, PhD 🦋🌎✨🤗
@SashaMTL
·
360d
@JeffDean @GaryMarcus @bate5a55 Can we please stop focusing on this single number?
Let's just focus on improving the transparency around the environmental impacts of AI 🤗🌍
Jeff Dean (@🏡)
@JeffDean
·
360d
@GaryMarcus @bate5a55 @SashaMTL Except that original number was off in the other direction by three to five decimal orders of magnitude. See below.
Jeff Dean (@🏡)
@JeffDean
·
361d
@bate5a55 @SashaMTL Did you get this number from Strubell et. al? Because that number was a very flawed estimate that turned out to be off by 88X, and the paper also portrayed it as an every time cost when in fact it was a one time cost. The actual cost of training a model of the size they were…
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
361d
@bate5a55 @SashaMTL And that will increase by orders of magnitude as people pursue scaling
Akram Artul (50% human, 50% ai)
@bate5a55
·
361d
@SashaMTL Training a single large AI model can emit over 600,000 pounds of CO₂—the equivalent of the lifetime emissions of five cars. The environmental impact is significant and often overlooked.
Sasha Luccioni, PhD 🦋🌎✨🤗
@SashaMTL
·
361d
Typical Silicon Valley (pseudo-) logic: let's just pretend this tech is magic, and that its costs don't matter.
Yes, there are many meaningful climate-positive applications of AI, but we urgently need to address the environmental impacts of (superfluous) generative AI.

The statement engages in a discussion about transparency in reporting the environmental impacts of AI research, which is a public issue. The tone is constructive, expressing a desire for more openness in the field.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement aligns with the principle of doing no harm by advocating for transparency, which can lead to more informed decisions and potentially reduce environmental harm. [+1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The statement respects the privacy and dignity of others, as it does not engage in personal attacks or harassment. [+1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding and empathy by expressing a wish for transparency, which can foster better communication and collaboration. [+1]
  4. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement engages in constructive dialogue by focusing on the issue of transparency rather than personal attacks. [+1]