• PonyOfWar@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    16 hours ago

    DLSS5 sucks for many reasons, but “the ongoing destruction of the planet” is not really one of them, as it runs locally on a regular GPU.

    • accideath@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      16 hours ago

      The models were still (and probably still are actively being) trained in giant data centres that devour energy and water.
      Sure, you using it technically doesn’t hurt the environment any more but the technology as such definitely does.

      • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        The models were still (and probably still are actively being) trained in giant data centres that devour energy and water.

        I hate to tell you, but your Lemmy instance is in a datacenter too. Most everything on the Internet is in a datacenter.

        The important detail is that an upscaling model and a large language model are vastly different things despite both containing the word model and using neural networks.

        As to training costs. You can train an upscaling model on your phone in a few hours. It would take you millions of years to train an LLM on your phone (not to mention requiring about 12,000x as much RAM).

        You’re just repeating talking points on topics without understanding them or how they apply.

      • FishFace@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Training AI models takes quite a bit of energy. But probably less than you think. Without knowing how much you think I can’t say for sure, but I can say that AI is so far down the list of water consumers that any time it comes up I can be fairly confident.

        • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 hours ago

          DLSS models are not even in the same league as LLMs from a training perspective.

          The comment section is full of people trying to use anti-LLM arguments against DLSS because they both use neural networks.

          It’s like people are against matches because they’re hot and nuclear weapons are hot so matches are basically nuclear weapons.

    • Takapapatapaka@tarte.nuage-libre.fr
      link
      fedilink
      Français
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Tbf the constant drive for more powerful pc components is one of the causes for planet destruction, though it’s not a leading cause and AI DLSS bs is not the only reason for this drive.

    • Sarah Valentine@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      16 hours ago

      That’s great marketing propaganda but you’re still supporting the shitty planet killing AI obsession. Keep bullshitting yourself if it makes you feel better but don’t try to bullshit me in the process.

      • PonyOfWar@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        16 hours ago

        That’s great marketing propaganda

        No, it’s an easily verifiable fact. I’m not supporting anything. I’m saying that we should argue against it with arguments that actually apply to the situation, such as DLSS5 destroying artistic intent, having an unreasonable performance cost etc.