[HN Gopher] Microsoft and Meta join Google in using AI to help r...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Microsoft and Meta join Google in using AI to help run their data
       centers
        
       Author : mikece
       Score  : 39 points
       Date   : 2022-06-18 14:14 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (techcrunch.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (techcrunch.com)
        
       | latchkey wrote:
       | I run the compute in multiple large scale datacenters. This is
       | such a silly sensationalist article. There is nothing "AI" about
       | this. It is nothing more than a programmed response to inputs.
        
         | notyourwork wrote:
         | Isn't that what AI is though? Models trained on data determine
         | how to react or respond based on data.
        
         | jeffbee wrote:
         | Isn't the difference that a machine may learn a relation
         | between the inputs and outputs that might escape a human
         | analyst?
        
       | tobinfekkes wrote:
       | Opening line: "Data centers.....can be hazardous places for the
       | workers...."
       | 
       | In the list of "possible jobs to have", data centers are
       | comparatively sterile.
       | 
       | Loud? Yes. Lonely? Yes. Vast? Yes. Hazardous? That's a stretch.
        
         | eCa wrote:
         | I had a lonely server at another datacenter of former webhost
         | ThePlanet when things exploded[1] back in 2008. So, while rare,
         | there are risks.
         | 
         | [1]
         | https://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2008/06/01/expl...
        
         | hn_version_0023 wrote:
         | Having worked in MS's DCs, they are, in fact, hazardous. They
         | absolutely push the limits on heat exposure for humans -- those
         | hot aisles are HOT, and we all carried heat index alarms as a
         | result.
         | 
         | Further, I think its weird you don't think of the sound as a
         | hazard. When its so loud you must wear 30+NRR hearing
         | protection, it sure _seems like a hazard to me_.
        
           | Group_B wrote:
           | Sounds like as long as you follow basic protocol it isn't
           | really hazardous.
        
             | hn_version_0023 wrote:
             | As long as you follow basic protocol _your outcome won 't
             | involve injury_. The hazard remains, and is the reason the
             | protocol exists.
        
             | hllooo wrote:
             | requiring special safety equipment seems like a pretty good
             | place to draw the line...
        
           | userbinator wrote:
           | _They absolutely push the limits on heat exposure for humans_
           | 
           | That sounds very different from my experience (not with MS
           | DCs) --- where it was loud (though not quite as loud as e.g.
           | an automotive shop) and windy, but the temperature was kept
           | at a controlled 68F (20C) and alerts were raised if it got
           | even slightly hotter than that.
           | 
           | Yes, I suppose there is more risk than sitting at a desk all
           | day, but I think the parent is comparing it to many other
           | jobs like those in the heavy equipment industry, mining,
           | farming, petro, etc.
        
           | nsheridan wrote:
           | Not to mention fire suppression systems and electrical risks.
        
         | jeffbee wrote:
         | Electricians are expected to work on and around live loads in
         | datacenters regularly. It's probably a lot more dangerous than
         | whatever you do.
        
       | sm001 wrote:
       | In the 1990's, an AI Corp developer (a woman friend of mine)
       | completely automated the management of a large IBM mainframe
       | using old fashioned AI. The computer worked in complete darkness.
       | She called it "lights out computing".
        
         | account-5 wrote:
         | What's "old fashioned AI"?
        
           | your_username wrote:
        
           | laerus wrote:
           | a bunch of "if" statements?
        
             | kabdib wrote:
             | Having seen the code for a couple of "intelligent
             | assistant" features: Yeah, basically a bunch of "if"
             | statements. (The IA for the Apple Newton was a ton of
             | special cases. It was clever, but certainly not
             | 'intelligent').
             | 
             | Thus, the technology of AI has improved from a sea of
             | spaghetti code that no human can understand, to a bunch of
             | neural net weights that no human can understand. I love the
             | march of progress. :-)
        
             | superjan wrote:
             | I believe this refers to decision trees that, at the time
             | were referred to as "Expert systems", which were considered
             | a type of AI.
        
             | riku_iki wrote:
             | Maybe more like prolog?
        
           | andreyk wrote:
           | This (presumably) refers to "Good ol' Fashioned AI" aka
           | Symbolic AI (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbolic_artificia
           | l_intelligen...) . It's a bit of an over-simplification to
           | say it's a bunch of if statements, but it does involve
           | encoding a bunch of rules/symbols by humans (as opposed to
           | learning from data). It's a largely dead paradigm, though
           | aspects of it are still found in various modern approaches
           | (eg task and motion planning, knowledge bases, etc.) often in
           | combination with learning approaches.
        
       | im3w1l wrote:
       | HAL: I know that you and Frank were planning to disconnect me,
       | and I'm afraid that's something I cannot allow to happen.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-06-18 23:01 UTC)