Re:We read the paper that forced Timnit Gebru out of Google
by ramraj07 on Saturday December 05, 2020 @09:21AM
(#25314728)
I'm more interested in the related nugget, which is the carbon footprint of a Google Search. Some estimates from a decade back put it at 7g (boil a cup of water), but since then it's probably only gotten larger. However if Google's dstacenters truly carbon neutral, does it even matter?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:We read the paper that forced Timnit Gebru out of Google
by confuseshrink on Saturday December 05, 2020 @09:29AM
(#25314769)
Yes it's something I often see ignored as "common knowledge" dictates that in ML inference is way cheaper than training. But if you're running a model in production at google with loads of google searches hitting it every second. At what point does the inference costs start to outweigh the training costs?
I simply have no idea where the hinge point is. This could inform other questions like, could it be worth to scale up to get a more accurate model (pay up-front in training) to avoid further searches (inference)?
Re:We read the paper that forced Timnit Gebru out of Google
by oever on Saturday December 05, 2020 @09:37AM
(#25314813)
Green energy is often used in addition to the carbon-based energy. The total amount of used energy increases. Green energy should replace carbon-base energy.
Wind and solar are finite too. The places where they can be harvested are scarce. So if Google using up green energy for bells and whistles on the search page, less homes can use green energy for heating and transport.