[HN Gopher] A.I. Needs Copper. It Just Helped to Find Millions o...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       A.I. Needs Copper. It Just Helped to Find Millions of Tons of It in
       Zambia.
        
       Author : bookofjoe
       Score  : 52 points
       Date   : 2024-07-14 19:55 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.nytimes.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.nytimes.com)
        
       | bookofjoe wrote:
       | https://archive.ph/82UT7
        
       | lifeisstillgood wrote:
       | Copper mining is insane - vast vast machines (like apartment
       | buildings on wheels) because the ore extraction rate is so low.
       | 
       | But this is a boon to a democratic light in the Southern Africa,
       | (https://georgetownsecuritystudiesreview.org/2023/05/05/zambi...)
       | here's hoping they negotiate hard with the miners and stuff as
       | much revenue into solid projects (roads hospitals schools etc)
        
         | jm_l wrote:
         | Having valuable natural resources historically seems to be a
         | big detriment to stable democratic governance.
        
           | fritzo wrote:
           | Witness Bougainville
        
           | robocat wrote:
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse
           | The resource curse, also known as the paradox of plenty or
           | the poverty paradox, is the phenomenon of countries with an
           | abundance of natural resources (such as fossil fuels and
           | certain minerals) having less economic growth, less
           | democracy, or worse development outcomes than countries with
           | fewer natural resources. There are many theories and much
           | academic debate about the reasons for and exceptions to the
           | adverse outcomes. Most experts believe the resource curse is
           | not universal or inevitable but affects certain types of
           | countries or regions under certain conditions.
        
       | saulpw wrote:
       | Turns out it won't be a paperclip maximizer but a battery
       | optimizer.
        
       | mproud wrote:
       | Of course they don't explain how it found the copper, but I
       | suppose the article is less about A.I. and more about the need
       | for copper.
        
         | HenryBemis wrote:
         | My imagination tells me that they 'fed' it with all
         | geographical/geological data available, and cross referenced
         | them with various locations of mines (different ores)(gold,
         | cobalt, copper, etc.) and the "machine" "figured out" that
         | (silly example) river + mountain + over500m + earthquakes (or
         | lack of) + various other parameters = so-and-so ore.
         | 
         | There may be some 'coincidences'/similarities that require many
         | parameters that the eye misses, while the "AI" can combine far
         | more parameters.
        
         | Am4TIfIsER0ppos wrote:
         | Isn't that half the point of new AI, or "AI" stuff? That it
         | can't tell you how it knows X?
        
       | hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
       | So I guess "A.I." is the new buzzword for how we describe all
       | digital technology going forward. FWIW I thought this was a
       | better article that described the actual tech used by KoBold,
       | https://spectrum.ieee.org/ai-mining. Now, that article was
       | written by the KoBold CEO, so there are certainly parts of it I'd
       | take with a giant chunk of salt, but I think it's easier to read
       | that article (and read past some of the AI buzzwords) to see how
       | they're probably using (a) better surveying tech and (b) standard
       | machine learning techniques to generate maps of potential
       | deposits.
        
         | Wowfunhappy wrote:
         | I generally dislike the term AI because it _could_ reasonably
         | describe most computer programs.
         | 
         | However, in this case machine learning is involved, so even by
         | a narrower definition calling it "AI" seems more than fair.
        
         | Mathnerd314 wrote:
         | IMO AI means neural net. I get that people use it for other
         | things, but that's what I use it to mean - there is just no
         | other term that's easy to say. And at this point the idea of
         | breaking problems down into "neurons" and activation patterns
         | is inherent to most AI models. Here though the keywords are
         | "ensemble machine learning" and "Bayesian" - they could have
         | used a neural net for the machine learning but most likely it
         | is just XGBoost or similar.
         | https://ia.acs.org.au/article/2021/the-ml-technology-looking...
         | mentions they are also doing full-physics joint inversions and
         | computer vision, perhaps the vision is a neural net.
        
           | varjag wrote:
           | Historically however AI didn't mean a neural net
           | specifically.
        
         | chefandy wrote:
         | > So I guess "A.I." is the new buzzword for how we describe all
         | digital technology going forward
         | 
         | I wonder if any companies are getting deals on compute for
         | making a big splashy deal out of the part ML played in these
         | processes. Kind of a B2B meets Twikstogrube Influencer
         | marketing strategy, but instead of companies having cachet
         | because a bunch of social media followers find them appealing,
         | they actually manifest things in the physical world. That is a
         | big hole in the Generative AI company sales pitch for a) non-
         | early-adopter potential customers, and b) many others looking
         | uneasily at the kind of resources they're tearing through when
         | the only tangible things they've seen from it are a pitches for
         | features they never asked for and don't care about, and very
         | concerning faked images and videos for extortion, bullying,
         | porn, and political shit. I'm not saying those things are all
         | its good for, but the communication about the real-world value
         | of this stuff has been pretty lacking, and the drawbacks have
         | been understandably shouted from the rooftops, so they're
         | probably preeeetttyyy thirsty for stories like this.
        
         | shhsdydywhwhb wrote:
         | Ml became ai because it's the base for ai.
         | 
         | It's just what it is.
         | 
         | Nonetheless LLM Made it a lot easier for people to understand
         | that investment in ml is really really helpful
        
         | pgorczak wrote:
         | "That means the conventional predictions are largely inference
         | --and worse, they result in unquantified uncertainty."
         | 
         | Wild claim given the fact that Gaussian process regression /
         | Kriging was invented in the 1960s in geoscience to do exactly
         | what the article claims only their models do: "quantify
         | uncertainty, which in turn guides our data collection, as the
         | most uncertain rocks often represent the most valuable ones to
         | sample"
        
         | ViktorRay wrote:
         | The article you linked was written by the CEO of the company.
         | 
         | So it's not going to go into detail about possible negative
         | impacts of the mining in the same way that the original NYtimes
         | article does.
        
       | kristianp wrote:
       | > We need 25 times as much cobalt as we currently mine
       | 
       | Is that really true? I've lost significant money investing in
       | explorers that hoped the Cobalt price would stay high. It hasn't,
       | but also its hard to compete with Congo's mines.
        
         | mschuster91 wrote:
         | Well... _most_ current lithium battery chemistries absolutely
         | require cobalt, and given the demand for EVs and grid-scale PV
         | storage there 's bound to be a lot of interest for it.
         | 
         | Unfortunately for cobalt miners, there's _significant_ r &d
         | investment into chemistries free of materials which are
         | dominantly sourced from questionable countries/conditions -
         | some driven by preparation for trade conflicts, and some driven
         | by law (EU supply chain / anti slavery acts). And that is
         | yielding its first results, e.g. [1].
         | 
         | [1]
         | https://www.global.toshiba/ww/technology/corporate/rdc/rd/to...
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-07-14 23:01 UTC)