←back to thread

56 points trott | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.549s | source
Show context
ofrzeta ◴[] No.40714106[source]
"If trends continue, language models will fully utilize this stock between 2026 and 2032" - that will require data centers with their own nuclear reactors (or other power plants) as hinted at by Marc Zuckerberg?
replies(2): >>40714248 #>>40714295 #
trott ◴[] No.40714248[source]
If you take Llama-3-400B, and 30x its data (hitting the data ceiling, AFAICT), 30x its size to match, and the hardware improves by, say, 3x, then you'll use up about a year's worth of energy from a typical nuclear power plant.
replies(3): >>40714269 #>>40714294 #>>40714809 #
monero-xmr ◴[] No.40714809[source]
If someone is willing to pay, who cares? Energy has a price. Focus on regulating how energy is generated, and when prices climb the market will solve the problem.

If instead you focus on using the government to outlaw demand, only failure will follow. I mean, didn't the government outlawing the demand for illegal drugs fail miserably? I believe drugs are cheaper, more potent, and more available than ever.

Similarly, if there is demand for compute, then compute will occur. There is always a clearing price commiserate with the risk.

replies(1): >>40715727 #
1. amanaplanacanal ◴[] No.40715727[source]
A carbon tax would be the most free market way to do it: tax fossil carbon as it comes out of the ground. The market can handle the rest. Can’t seem to make that happen politically, though.
replies(1): >>40717387 #
2. DrNosferatu ◴[] No.40717387[source]
Careful with carbon tax plans, they can be regressive:

https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/energy/what-carbon-tax-can-do...