• Jeena@jemmy.jeena.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    This seems like a better candidate for AI, GPUs are just to energy inefficient.

      • MaggiWuerze@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Probably depends on our part in its emergence. If we purposely set it on a path that we think ends there, I would still call it artificial. If it emerges through a process unknown and unintended by us, I wouldn’t.

      • Jeena@jemmy.jeena.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        That compares a whole human vs. A graphics card. If you only have connected brain cells, I imagine that it would be much cheaper than having to sustain a whole body.

        • DragonTypeWyvern
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          It’s a pretty horrifying article tbh. The assumptions and conclusions it’s making if you just start asking yourself how you actually save that energy should be obvious.