How dumb is "Sam Altman" to immediately frame AI energy debate as human vs AI
| jet sanctuary | 02/22/26 | | soul-stirring dilemma | 02/22/26 | | passionate puppy house | 02/22/26 | | nubile laser beams | 02/22/26 | | pontificating background story lettuce | 02/22/26 | | passionate puppy house | 02/22/26 | | tantric cocky genital piercing | 02/23/26 | | Flickering address roommate | 02/23/26 | | passionate puppy house | 02/23/26 | | robot daddy | 02/28/26 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: February 22nd, 2026 4:31 PM Author: passionate puppy house
He's not wrong.
Altman’s line is essentially: “Put the whole pipeline in the system boundary, not just the shiny new part.
It block's the common fallacy: "AI energy is a waste because it's new".
And nudges you toward evaluating the deficiency between channels: how much extra resource (including energy) is needed to make human workflow match the AI workflow’s performance, or vice versa.
That's not a purity test, that's an efficiency frontier.
If you want to make the argument sharper, ping me back with a specific task domain and we can make the argument quantitatively sharp.
Just say the word.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837286&forum_id=2),#49687449) |
|
|