Modern AI data centers consume enormous amounts of power, and it looks like they will get even more power-hungry in the coming years as companies like Google, Microsoft, Meta, and OpenAI strive towards artificial general intelligence (AGI). Oracle has already outlined plans to use nuclear power plants for its 1-gigawatt datacenters. It looks like Microsoft plans to do the same as it just inked a deal to restart a nuclear power plant to feed its data centers, reports Bloomberg.

  • Etterra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    21 hours ago

    I’m sure that everyone will recognize that this was a great idea in a couple of years when generative LLM AI goes the way of the NFT.

    • TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 hours ago

      LLMs have real uses, even if they’re being overhyped right now. Even if they do fail, though, more nuclear power is a great outcome

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      18 hours ago

      Honestly, it probably is a great idea regardless. The plant operated for a very long time profitably. I’m sure it can again with some maintenance and upgrades. People only know three mile island for the (not so disastrous) disaster, but the rest of the plant operated for decades after without any issues.

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

        It’s one of a hell of an old nuclear plant if it’s the original three mile island one.

      • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        12 hours ago

        with some maintenance and upgrades.

        Hopefully we can trust these tech bros to do that properly and without using their usual “move fast and break things” approach.

        • Cethin@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          9 hours ago

          They are only buying 100% of the output. The old owners are still owning and operating it.

        • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 hours ago

          And if they do skimp on maintenance and upgrades and the plant melts down, we can be assured that no harm will come to the company because the scale of the disaster would wipe them out and they’re “too big to fail.”

    • douglasg14b@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      16 hours ago

      Nfts were a scam from the start something that has no actual purpose utility or value being given value through hype.

      Generative AI is very different. In my honest opinion you have to have your head in the sand if you don’t believe that AI is only going to incrementally improve and expand in capabilities. Just like it has year over year for the last 5 to 10 years. And just like for the last decade it continues to solve more and more real-world problems in increasingly effective manners.

      It isn’t just constrained to llms either.

      • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        16 hours ago

        The creators who made the LLM boom said they cannot improve it any more with the current technique due to diminishing returns.

        It’s worthless in its current state.

        Should be dying out faster imo.

        • oatscoop@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          One of the major problems with LLMs is it’s a “boom”. People are rightfully soured on them as a concept because jackasses trying to make money lie about their capabilities and utility – never mind the ethics of obtaining the datasets used to train them.

          They’re absolutely limited, flawed, and there are better solutions for most problems … but beyond the bullshit LLMs are a useful tool for some problems and they’re not going away.

          • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 hours ago

            I cannot think of one single application where an LLM is better or even equivalent than having a person do the job. Its real only use is to trade human workers for cheaper but inferior output, at the detriment to mankind as a whole because we have in excess labor and in shortage power.

        • EnoBlk@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 hours ago

          That’s one groups opinion, we still see improving LLMs I’m sure they will continue to improve and be adapted for whatever future use we need them. I mean I personally find them great in their current state for what I use them for

          • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 hours ago

            What skin do you have in this game? Leading industry experts, who btw want to SELL IT TO YOU, told you it has hit a ceiling. Why do you refute it so much? Let it die, we will all be better off.