Yes they are - in the article I specifically mentioned Amazon and Google but it would be reasonable to say that all the big tech companies are being forced to contract for power generated by gas and other fossil fuel burning generation in order to keep up with demand for processing capacity.
The rhetoric is that environmental sustainability is still a priority for the big tech companies but it seems to have slipped a few notches in importance now that the race is on for AI supremacy (whatever that actually means and whether or not it is something that is achievable) - as I have written previously I suspect it isn't and this big AI build will end up being a big headache for the tech companies as they work out that they have spent billions on a rollout, they still don't have a sustainable competitive advantage and AI migrates to local devices rather than huge distant data centres.
It is the executives of the AI companies who are driving behaviour - they see a big payday coming and it appears have de-prioritised their prior firm and intractable environmental stance. The question is - is this a licence to operate issue? Will the public sit by and a) allow them to pollute and b) put up with higher priced electricity because AI demand has forced market prices higher? This all remains to be seen
Meanwhile isn't Amazon contributing to greenhouse gases too ?
Yes they are - in the article I specifically mentioned Amazon and Google but it would be reasonable to say that all the big tech companies are being forced to contract for power generated by gas and other fossil fuel burning generation in order to keep up with demand for processing capacity.
Why can't AI figure out how to power itself without destroying the environment?
The rhetoric is that environmental sustainability is still a priority for the big tech companies but it seems to have slipped a few notches in importance now that the race is on for AI supremacy (whatever that actually means and whether or not it is something that is achievable) - as I have written previously I suspect it isn't and this big AI build will end up being a big headache for the tech companies as they work out that they have spent billions on a rollout, they still don't have a sustainable competitive advantage and AI migrates to local devices rather than huge distant data centres.
I appreciate your time trying to find a reasonable explanation
(sometimes, it seems AI is dumb, if it can't figure out how to power itself without destroying the environment. It looks like suicidal.)
It is the executives of the AI companies who are driving behaviour - they see a big payday coming and it appears have de-prioritised their prior firm and intractable environmental stance. The question is - is this a licence to operate issue? Will the public sit by and a) allow them to pollute and b) put up with higher priced electricity because AI demand has forced market prices higher? This all remains to be seen
Inspired by your patience, explaining what I think is nonsense.
Clover is some type of software it reduces 80%-90% pollution from AI
https://mitsloan.mit.edu/ideas-made-to-matter/ai-has-high-data-center-energy-costs-there-are-solutions
Well said.