Do kids draw in a private room, with no other kids around, and are blindfolded from birth until one day, they're given crayons and paper? Do they also not see pictures in books read to them by adults? They may not have taken an art history class and ingested an Internet's worth of Artstation and Greg Rutkowski, but they have plenty of outside influence.
Of course, their limited motor skills get in the way, but they're working on it.
The most stereotypical kid drawing is of themselves in a house with their parents. They do not need to sample other drawings to get to that.
Regardless, if we go back a few centuries, humans definitely demonstrated their ability to physically draw on paper, without sampling from sources other than their eyes.
But even if we were to consider that human eyes are effectively a way to “collect” samples, that’s another thing not taken into account in the aforementioned article.
With this study's hack back-of-the-envelop math counting "human being alive while creating" as part of their calculation, AI should have to include the entire carbon output of any artist or writer that exists in it's training data for the time they were creating that art.
Just a quick glance shows that they consider the overall emissions of a persons day to day life to be involved in the act of writing:
"The emission footprint of a US resident is approximately 15 metric tons CO2e per year (14), or approximately 1.7kg CO2e per hour. Therefore, assuming that a person’s emissions while writing are in line with their overall annual impact, we propose that the carbon footprint for a US resident generating a page of text (250 words) is approximately 1400 grams CO2e."
That's a pretty big assumption, which seems hardly scientific. You would think that they would isolate the act of writing and measure that against the CO2 emissions of equivalent AI.
They should also measure the CO2 emissions of a human at resting state vs. a human engaged in the act of writing. This would reveal the exact 'cost' of human writing.
I only skimmed the article, so may have missed something, but it doesn't seem that they are taking into account how much CO2 emission humans emit just for living.
If I spend an hour writing my emissions will be about the same as if I had instead spent that hour reading, or watching TV, or playing my guitar, or doing most other things I do.
Computers can be turned off when not working so only need to cause CO2 emission when actually working. Humans cannot be turned off between jobs.
Like the cyanobacteria before us which killed off most previous life by overloading this planet with oxygen, maybe we're just prepping the world for the next forms of life which will live on CO2.
29 comments
[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 236 ms ] threadOf course, their limited motor skills get in the way, but they're working on it.
Regardless, if we go back a few centuries, humans definitely demonstrated their ability to physically draw on paper, without sampling from sources other than their eyes.
But even if we were to consider that human eyes are effectively a way to “collect” samples, that’s another thing not taken into account in the aforementioned article.
anyone know?
[1]: https://ai.stackexchange.com/questions/38970/how-much-energy...
[2]: https://ai.stackexchange.com/questions/38970/how-much-energy...
"The emission footprint of a US resident is approximately 15 metric tons CO2e per year (14), or approximately 1.7kg CO2e per hour. Therefore, assuming that a person’s emissions while writing are in line with their overall annual impact, we propose that the carbon footprint for a US resident generating a page of text (250 words) is approximately 1400 grams CO2e."
That's a pretty big assumption, which seems hardly scientific. You would think that they would isolate the act of writing and measure that against the CO2 emissions of equivalent AI.
It's hard not to point out that the authors aren't scholars in this field, but essentially AI apologists.
If I spend an hour writing my emissions will be about the same as if I had instead spent that hour reading, or watching TV, or playing my guitar, or doing most other things I do.
Computers can be turned off when not working so only need to cause CO2 emission when actually working. Humans cannot be turned off between jobs.