Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How AI labs are solving the power problem

newsletter.semianalysis.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 270 posts

Re: How AI labs are solving the power problem

#231

Post by sokoloff »

imglorp wrote: post #11
goda90 wrote: post #3

Power problem: solved Natural Gas supply problem: worsened Carbon in the atmosphere problem: worsened

And the air quality around these plants is poor, leading to health problems for the neighbors. This short term, destructive, thinking should be criminalized. I think it's time to discuss changing the incentives around ai deployment, specifically paying into a ubi fund whenever human jobs are replaced by ai. Musk himself raised the idea. https://www.indexbox.io/blog/tech-leaders-push-for-universal...

> specifically paying into a ubi fund whenever human jobs are replaced by ai

Without agreeing or disagreeing with this idea, I’m left wondering how you’d write such a law.

If company A fires Bob and says “Bob’s job is now done with AI”, that’s a clear case.

What if Bob was on a team of 8 and they just go without backfilling Bob? Maybe AI was the cause; maybe it was the better coffee they got for the office; maybe the workload just shrank a bit; maybe they’re worried about the economic outlook for next year…

Or company A fires Bob and his whole team and outsources to company B. Maybe company B is more efficient at that business process. Maybe they were more efficient before using AI. Maybe they don’t even use AI at all. Maybe they were more efficient before AI but are even more efficient now. In which cases were “jobs replaced by AI”?

Maybe I start a company C and do that business process with 4 people and AI that would take other companies 8-25 people. A brand new company D starts and uses my company C instead of hiring a team to do it or contracting with company B. Were any “human jobs replaced by AI”? Whose job(s)?

Re: How AI labs are solving the power problem

#232

Post by dragonwriter »

imglorp wrote: post #11
goda90 wrote: post #3

Power problem: solved Natural Gas supply problem: worsened Carbon in the atmosphere problem: worsened

And the air quality around these plants is poor, leading to health problems for the neighbors. This short term, destructive, thinking should be criminalized. I think it's time to discuss changing the incentives around ai deployment, specifically paying into a ubi fund whenever human jobs are replaced by ai. Musk himself raised the idea. https://www.indexbox.io/blog/tech-leaders-push-for-universal...

> specifically paying into a ubi fund whenever human jobs are replaced by ai.

Then existing firms will just go bankrupt, and new firms which never had human employees will use AI, and you’ll have the same job losses but no direct replacement and no payment into the UBI fund. Instead, just tax capital gains and retained corporate profits more than currently (taxing the former the same as normal income, with provision for both advance recognition and deferment of windfalls so that irregular capital income doesn't get unfairly taxed compared to recurring income), and fund UBI with a share of that is initially basically the difference between status quo taxes and the new rates. That realigns the incentives, such that an increased share of the economy being capture by capital (a natural consequence of goods and services being produced in a more capital intensive, less labor intensive way) drives more money into the UBI fund, without needing a specific job-level replacement count to drive the funding.

Re: How AI labs are solving the power problem

#233

Post by Zacharias030 »

ACCount37 wrote: post #176
g8oz wrote: post #101

>>xAI entirely bypassed the grid and generated power onsite, using truck-mounted gas turbines and engines. These generators polluted the nearby historically black neighborhoods in Memphis Tennessee with nitrogen oxides. Residents are afraid to open their windows, with the elderly, children and those suffering from conditions like COPD particularly affected. Lawsuits alleging environmental racism are pending. xAI says…

These "gas turbines" are located next door to the Allen Combined Cycle Plant, a grid scale natural gas power plant with 1.1GW capacity. It's there to power a nearby steel mill. That's the kind of neighborhood xAI has put its cluster in. I'm incredibly skeptical of any claim that xAI's power use is putting a dent in the local environment, and "environmental racism" just reeks of the usual agenda pushing.

This stance strikes me as questionable, to use the first hunch that comes to mind to seed doubt in a topic that is researched and reported by multiple fairly reputable sources and multiple people on the ground.

Re: How AI labs are solving the power problem

#234

Post by black_puppydog »

rossjudson wrote: post #227
XorNot wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously this: smoke stacks are a carefully engineered structure specially to ensure air emissions diffuse and don't roll along the ground. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnYdt4T76mk You absolutely cannot park a bunch of truck mounted generators next to an existing plant and go "yeah it won't make a difference".

Once, when I was a child, I remember the carefully engineered smoke stacks in Sudbury Ontario spilling out acrid smoke sideways, and then straight down into the town. Back then, Sudbury looked like Mars.

So you're saying when not done properly, emissions have very direct negative impact on the surrounding community. Did I get that right?

Re: How AI labs are solving the power problem

#235

Post by Zacharias030 »

goku12 wrote: post #226
ACCount37 wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These "gas turbines" are located next door to the Allen Combined Cycle Plant, a grid scale natural gas power plant with 1.1GW capacity. It's there to power a nearby steel mill. That's the kind of neighborhood xAI has put its cluster in. I'm incredibly skeptical of any claim that xAI's power use is putting a dent in the local environment, and "environmental racism" just reeks of the usual agenda pushing.

Here are some quotes from an article [1] that directly addresses your point: > The turbines spew nitrogen oxides, also known as NOx, at an estimated rate of 1,200 to 2,000 tons a year — far more than the gas-fired power plant across the street or the oil refinery down the road. > The turbines are only temporary and don’t require federal permits for their emissions of NOx and other hazardous air pollutants like formal…

Thank you for pointing to these details!

Re: How AI labs are solving the power problem

#236

Post by goku12 »

Zacharias030 wrote: post #235
goku12 wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here are some quotes from an article [1] that directly addresses your point: > The turbines spew nitrogen oxides, also known as NOx, at an estimated rate of 1,200 to 2,000 tons a year — far more than the gas-fired power plant across the street or the oil refinery down the road. > The turbines are only temporary and don’t require federal permits for their emissions of NOx and other hazardous air pollutants like formal…

Thank you for pointing to these details!

You're welcome! And as you pointed out in your other comment, it's a bit frustrating when someone tries to sow doubt on well-established facts.

Re: How AI labs are solving the power problem

#237

Post by goku12 »

foobarqux wrote: post #194
ACCount37 wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These "gas turbines" are located next door to the Allen Combined Cycle Plant, a grid scale natural gas power plant with 1.1GW capacity. It's there to power a nearby steel mill. That's the kind of neighborhood xAI has put its cluster in. I'm incredibly skeptical of any claim that xAI's power use is putting a dent in the local environment, and "environmental racism" just reeks of the usual agenda pushing.

That plant is subject to regulations. The xAI turbines have evaded regulations by claiming that they are portable.

You're not very off the the mark. To add in that extra detail, xAI is using portable gas turbines that are meant for providing emergency backup power in case of a catastrophic loss of power, like in the event of a natural disaster. Being portable, they lack the systems necessary to avoid polluting the surrounding air with oxides of nitrogen and formaldehyde - really nasty stuff. That shouldn't normally cause a serious issue, since the turbines are meant for temporary backup alone. But at Memphis, xAI is stretching the meaning of 'temporary'.

Re: How AI labs are solving the power problem

#239

Post by dannersy »

Aurornis wrote: post #80
dannersy wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, if so then they are lying through their teeth.

Based on what? I’m inclined to trust a well known industry analyst over an HN comment with no basis.

Fair enough, but it has been stated over and over that OpenAI's (as well as others) plan for profit is subscriptions. If their revenue predictions are based on that, then like others have said, it is mathematically impossible.

Have you considered that the industry analysis might be a biased source since they are all in on a economic model that must grow at all costs or it collapses? Do you trust McKinsey consulting because they give industry analysis? Blind trust in these corporate entities is how we get Enron, WorldCom, and an opioid crisis.

But hey, I'm just some asshole on the internet. Carry on.

Re: How AI labs are solving the power problem

#240

Post by lenkite »

Lerc wrote: post #221
toofy wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i’m curious, are you skeptical xai would wiggle around regulations and pollute a city? by “agenda pushing” do you mean those who have an agenda to have breathable air? because that seems like an entirely reasonable agenda to me.

That seems like an odd framing. For my part I am prepared to accept that XAI might attempt to flout regulations. If I knew more about their operating practices I might even expect it. Even in that case I would not expect it to be the case that you could assume that they had done in any individual case. While this isn't criminal law, the principle that underlies innocent until proven guilty still applies. I don't thin…

What "flawed argument" ? All facts and evidence have been provided - the measured nitrogen dioxide increase of ~80% will harm the respiratory system. Folks who cause harm should be punished not excused.
Post reply on HN