[vertis]

I mean if you care about that you shouldn't be running anything that isn't highly optimized. Don't open webpages that might be CPU or GPU intensive. Don't run Electron apps, or really anything that isn't built in a compiled language.

Certainly you should do an audit of all the Android and iOS apps as well, to make sure they've been made in a efficient manner.

Block ads as well, they waste power.

This file identification is SUCH a small aspect of everything that is burning power in your laptop or phone as to be laughable.

[_puk]

Whilst energy usage is indeed a small aspect this early on when using bespoke models, we do have to consider that this is a model for simply identifying a file type.

What happens when we introduce more bespoke models for manipulating the data in that file?

This feels like it could slowly boil to the point of programs using magnitudes higher power, at which point it'll be hard to claw it back.

[vertis]

That's a slippery slope argument, which is a common logical fallacy[0]. This model being inefficient compared to the best possible implementation does not mean that future additions will also be inefficient.

It's the equivalent to saying many people programming in Ruby is causing all future programs to be less efficient. Which is not true. In fact, many people programming in Ruby has caused Ruby to become more efficient because it gets optimised as it gets used more (or Python for that matter).

It's not as energy efficient as C, but it hasn't caused it to get worse and worse, and spiral out of control.

Likewise smart contracts are incredibly inefficient mechanisms of computation. The result is mostly that people don't use them for any meaningful amounts of computation, that all gets done "Off Chain".

Generative AI is definitely less efficient, but it's likely to improve over time, and indeed things like quantization has allowed models that would normally to require much more substantial hardware resources (and therefore, more energy intensive) to be run on smaller systems.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope

[diffeomorphism]

That is a fallacy fallacy. Just because some slopes are not slippery that does not mean none of them are.

[samatman]

The slippery slope fallacy is: "this is a slope. you will slip down it." and is always fallacious. Always. The valid form of such an argument is: "this is a slope, and it is a slippery one, therefore, you will slip down it."

[diffeomorphism]

No, it isn't.

[samatman]

Yeah. Yeah, it is.

[thfuran]

>This feels like it could slowly boil to the point of programs using magnitudes higher power, at which point it'll be hard to claw it back.

We're already there. Modern software is, by and large, profoundly inefficient.