+- Punaweb Forum (https://punaweb.org/forum)
+-- Forum: Punaweb Forums (https://punaweb.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Punatalk (https://punaweb.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: The Weekly Update (/showthread.php?tid=23918)
The Weekly Update - Wao nahele kane - 06-12-2026
RE: The Weekly Update - TomK - 06-12-2026
Who did the art? It's a wonderful piece of work.
RE: The Weekly Update - kalianna - 06-12-2026
AI Slop, stolen from many artists at great energy cost.
RE: The Weekly Update - MyManao - 06-12-2026
Yep, mindless idiots amusing themselves to our death..
From.. https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/12/01/1084189/making-an-image-with-generative-ai-uses-as-much-energy-as-charging-your-phone/
Making an image with generative AI uses as much energy as charging your phone
Which begins..
Each time you use AI to generate an image, write an email, or ask a chatbot a question, it comes at a cost to the planet.
In fact, generating an image using a powerful AI model takes as much energy as fully charging your smartphone, according to a new study by researchers at the AI startup Hugging Face and Carnegie Mellon University. However, they found that using an AI model to generate text is significantly less energy-intensive. Creating text 1,000 times only uses as much energy as 16% of a full smartphone charge.
Their work, which is yet to be peer reviewed, shows that while training massive AI models is incredibly energy intensive, it’s only one part of the puzzle. Most of their carbon footprint comes from their actual use.
The study is the first time researchers have calculated the carbon emissions caused by using an AI model for different tasks, says Sasha Luccioni, an AI researcher at Hugging Face who led the work. She hopes understanding these emissions could help us make informed decisions about how to use AI in a more planet-friendly way.
Luccioni and her team looked at the emissions associated with 10 popular AI tasks on the Hugging Face platform, such as question answering, text generation, image classification, captioning, and image generation. They ran the experiments on 88 different models. For each of the tasks, such as text generation, Luccioni ran 1,000 prompts, and measured the energy used with a tool she developed called Code Carbon. Code Carbon makes these calculations by looking at the energy the computer consumes while running the model. The team also calculated the emissions generated by doing these tasks using eight generative models, which were trained to do different tasks.
Generating images was by far the most energy- and carbon-intensive AI-based task. Generating 1,000 images with a powerful AI model, such as Stable Diffusion XL, is responsible for roughly as much carbon dioxide as driving the equivalent of 4.1 miles in an average gasoline-powered car. In contrast, the least carbon-intensive text generation model they examined was responsible for as much CO2 as driving 0.0006 miles in a similar vehicle. Stability AI, the company behind Stable Diffusion XL, did not respond to a request for comment.
But yeah our in-house narcissistic wannabe thinks it great. So carry on Kane, destroy the planet for your amusement.
RE: The Weekly Update - HereOnThePrimalEdge - 06-12-2026
Artificial computer regurgitation, complaining about human interaction, prompt inputs by a human who claims to have blocked most of the other humans on Punaweb. Kids these days, playing in the company of their future robot overlords.
I imagine it goes something like this:
I’ve blocked you, so can’t read anything you post. Instead, I send in my AI thingamabob to read what I definitely don’t read, then ask it to create a cartoon, which contains text bubbles and animals that may or may not depict what I haven’t read. Then I post it. Ha, ha, ha, gotcha again with AI. Be back in two or three months with my insults about your insults.
RE: The Weekly Update - TomK - 06-13-2026
(06-12-2026, 06:13 AM)MyManao Wrote: But yeah our in-house narcissistic wannabe thinks it great. So carry on Kane, destroy the planet for your amusement.
I think it's a great piece of art, whether it was created by AI or a human. I don't think a piece of artwork is going to destroy the planet, though. The Mona Lisa was painted with oil-based paints, but there's no outcry about that, and I don't think Kane, on his own, is going to destroy the planet by posting that picture. That's the over-the-top woke nonsense we see more than ever because a snowflake's feelings were hurt. Claiming there's a narcissistic wannabe screams of desperation.
Kane, if you have the time and energy, please post another piece of art. I might try it myself.
RE: The Weekly Update - kalianna - 06-13-2026
ITʻS A CARTOON!!! Stick to science, Bud.
RE: The Weekly Update - TomK - 06-13-2026
(06-13-2026, 07:08 AM)kalianna Wrote: ITʻS A CARTOON!!! Stick to science, Bud.
Yes, I know it's a cartoon. Jeeze. It's also a very good piece of art. If you don't think it is, why not tell us why? And I don't think the cartoon, piece of art, whatever you want to call it, means Kane is going to destroy the planet for his amusement. I'm not the person you should be arguing with, and I hope Kane posts more cartoons like it. MyManao is the person who has a problem with it, not me.
Sometimes I feel as though I'm debating issues with ten-year-olds.
RE: The Weekly Update - Wao nahele kane - 06-13-2026
RE: The Weekly Update - TomK - 06-13-2026
Did the same myself.