But, we don’t really want to encourage the use of AI as a technology, despite its helpfulness. Its destroying so much already like clean water, habitats for animals, the sound generated from there data centers drives off wildlife. The pollution (Grok running on jet engine turbines to power the TX plants ), etc.
Unless there are those running their own tiny instances, it’s not really worth it.
As people mentioned in other publication about this those problems, which are devastating, are not being caused by the technology itself but the corpos (and the diabolical and insatiable greed of those who run them) behind it. As you are concluding, local llms can be fine, though I’d think he could have a stronger instance about that point - trying to discourage people about using corporate llms and incentivating local llms.
I agree with you, and also consider the current AI setup destructive and unethical all the way from the model creation from mostly stolen data to the data centers to run it with the issue you listed.
I would also prefer if more people spoke up on that to fasten the demise of this current hype.
That being said I also realise that Linux (and therefore the kernel) is incredibly important in a different fight for privacy and owning our own devices. If it were to fall behind because they completely lock themselves off from the admittedly useful aspects of AI, it could backfire in a different way.
I think it’s a lose-lose situation here and he understandably picked the side that’s more impactful for the Linux kernel (and him).
But, we don’t really want to encourage the use of AI as a technology, despite its helpfulness. Its destroying so much already like clean water, habitats for animals, the sound generated from there data centers drives off wildlife. The pollution (Grok running on jet engine turbines to power the TX plants ), etc.
Unless there are those running their own tiny instances, it’s not really worth it.
As people mentioned in other publication about this those problems, which are devastating, are not being caused by the technology itself but the corpos (and the diabolical and insatiable greed of those who run them) behind it. As you are concluding, local llms can be fine, though I’d think he could have a stronger instance about that point - trying to discourage people about using corporate llms and incentivating local llms.
I agree with you, and also consider the current AI setup destructive and unethical all the way from the model creation from mostly stolen data to the data centers to run it with the issue you listed.
I would also prefer if more people spoke up on that to fasten the demise of this current hype.
That being said I also realise that Linux (and therefore the kernel) is incredibly important in a different fight for privacy and owning our own devices. If it were to fall behind because they completely lock themselves off from the admittedly useful aspects of AI, it could backfire in a different way.
I think it’s a lose-lose situation here and he understandably picked the side that’s more impactful for the Linux kernel (and him).