wonderingwanderer

Wow, you really are braindead. No one here is arguing against there being an enormous amount of bot traffic. Learn to interpret what you read.

I never said anything about the relative proportion if internet traffic that is or isn't bots. Does your only argument require a severe misrepresentation of what anyone else is saying?

The fact is that the datacenters that have been rapidly accelerating the demise of the planet and its climate over the last 5-6 years are specifically AI datacenters. Getting rid of those, completely frivolous and unnecessary as they are, will go a long way to reducing the severity human-induced climate change.

Getting rid of the datacenters that make the internet possible would be negligible compared to that. But I'm just restating what I've already said at this point, because you're apparently either a troll or incapable of reading and understanding. Maybe both.

Taking away the internet from the billions of humans who use it just because it's flooded with bot traffic is a really stupid idea, when you could instead get rid of the datacenters that make the bots possible. The vast majority of compute operating these bots is happening at the bot-side of the internet, not at the datacenters running the internet. The actual amount of energy/compute used for that web traffic to travel from client to server is tiny compared to what's consumed at the bot farms.

What you're proposing is more akin to tearing up the highways in order to prevent drug trafficking. It doesn't solve the problem you're pretending to want to address, it's just a red herring that makes things worse for everyone else.

I'm actually telling the facts and you're the one being detached from reality, but normally people like you are "not interested in hearing about it" anyway, so I'm honestly not surprised you say that.

I'm done arguing with you for the same reason I don't debate climate change deniers.

Not even. The internet is the highway. The datacenters running the internet are the department of transportation. Average internet users are the compact hybrids, EVs, and cyclists who use the road. Prompts and outputs are the couriers driving various kinds of vehicles. AI datacenters are the giant trucks with smokestacks that smokescreen all the old grannies behind them.

The prompts and outputs traveling over the internet consume a negligible amount of energy. The bulk of it is consumed by training giant LLMs with hundreds of billions of parameters. A lesser portion is consumed by the inferencing those models do to produce outputs, which is done at the AI datacenters, and not what travels over the internet via internet datacenters.

You're missing the point so hard it's not even funny.

The datacenters hosting the internet are not the same datacenters hosting AI.

The ones hosting AI are the problem. Eliminate those, and the ones hosting the internet are fine (although could still convert to greener practices like on-site solar and closed-loop/greywater cooling systems, etc.).

Eliminate the internet datacenters and the AI corps are still going to destroy the environment, you just won't have access to wikipedia or the fediverse.

Oh, my bad. I didn't really need to take offense to it, I was probably just grumpy and didn't know what else to say. It wasn't that big a deal.

But no, I wasn't trying to be dismissive of your argument qua software engineering, but I see how it came off that way. I think it was a good argument, I was just bringing up something tangentially related out of nothing more than free-association style banter. In hindsight it wasn't really that relevant to the conversation anyway...

I'm only shocked that the "euphoria" hasn't collided with the disappointing reality yet. At least not catastrophically.

It seems the more abstracted the financial systems are, the more the finance industry can bullshit its way through. And at this point, money is just whatever numbers they type into their computers. Just completely made up and detached from reality.

Hold on, let me just solder together several billion MOSFETs and I'll sell you some homemade RAM on the cheap!

a floor price the company says comes with “a very robust gross margin for Micron, well above our peak quarterly margins in any past cycle.”

Fucking robber-barons.

“strategic customer agreements”

Quick question: what consumer is agreeing to this?

Yeah the explanation was fine but the "What? That's a very different situation" seemed unnecessarily hostile. But maybe it just have my panties in a bunch today, it could be me

Okay, so the argument does not apply to that situation. A simple "no" would have sufficed...