|
|
|
|
|
by phillipcarter
1269 days ago
|
|
While not unsolvable, I think the author is understating this problem a lot: > Also, let's put things in perspective: yes, it is enviromentally costly, but we aren't training that many of them, and the total cost is miniscule compared to all the other energy consumptions we humans do. Part of the reason LLMs aren't that big in the grand scheme of things is because they haven't been good enough and businesses haven't started to really adopt them. That will change, but the costs will be high because they're also extremely expensive to run. I think the author is focusing on the training costs for now, but that will likely get dwarfed by operational costs. What then? Waving one's arms and saying it'll just "get cheaper over time" isn't an acceptable answer because it's hard work and we don't really know how cheap we can get right now. It must be a focus if we actually care about widespread adoption and environmental impact. |
|
The interesting details are: the companies with large GPU/TPU fleets are already running them in fairly efficient setups, with high utilization (so you're not blowing carbon emissions on idle machines), and can scale those setups if demand increases. This is not irresonsible. And, the scaleup will only happen if the systems are actually useful.
Basically there are 100 other things I'd focus on trimming environment impact for before LLMs.