• zerakith@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 days ago

    I get the sentiment and I wish it were true.

    Some of the issues stem from material and energy limitations regardless of human organisation structures. Fossil Fuels are stored sunlight over a long period of time that means that burning them has a high yield and that’s given us a very high EROI society (one where there’s an abundance of energy for purposes that aren’t basic functioning).

    I recommend reading The Collapse of Complex Societies by Tainter who discussing the energy limitations of society. Its before our understanding of energy limitations of technology and he’s by no means a leftist but it is still a good introductory text to it.

    • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      I’ve read Limits to Growth. I understand there are physical limits and that we can’t just grow our way through this crisis. Industrial civilization can not continue as it is.

      But central planning would allow for us to transition to a lower energy society.

      • zerakith@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        I agree but there’s a lot of detail about what activities a lower energy society precludes and my point is that energy intensive “AI” (mostly thinking about LLMs rather than targets applications of ML) probably aren’t part of it.

        • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 days ago

          Deepseek showed that these chatbots can be run much more cheaply than they have been and it isn’t really necessary to build giga warehouses of servers. It might be possible to run them on even tighter hardware specifications too.

          Of course, chatbots aren’t AI and the fact that they’re trying to use them as AI isn’t going to work out anyway lol

          • zerakith@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 days ago

            Yes its clear that the path of throwing more and more resource at LLMS to improve quality has been a lazy growth focused approach that we could do better if we actually try a design focussed approach.

            For me though it comes back to the fact we are facing a polycrisis and most of our resource should be focused on looking for solutions to that and I’m not sure what problem* this technology solves yet alone what problem relating to the polycrisis.

            *I realise what they are designed to solve is a capitalist problem. How can we avoid paying staff for service and creative type jobs to increase profit.