Sam Altman would like remind you that humans use a lot of energy, too | TechCrunch
“But it also takes a lot of energy to train a human,” Altman said. “It takes like 20 years of life and all of the food you eat during that time before you get smart. And not only that, it took the very widespread evolution of the 100 billion people that have ever lived and learned not to get eaten by predators and learned how to figure out science and whatever, to produce you.”
So in his view, the fair comparison is, “If you ask ChatGPT a question, how much energy does it take once its model is trained to answer that question versus a human? And probably, AI has already caught up on an energy efficiency basis, measured that way.”
https://techcrunch.com/2026/02/21/sam-altman-would-like-remind-you-that-humans-use-a-lot-of-energy-too/Open linkView original on sopuli.xyz715
Comments185
This guy has the same level of empathy as Zuck.
dystopian novel type shit
Idk maybe we should do something about this man.
do it
I’ll get this one if you take Thiel
Silicon valley was a huge source of revenue for America... And when you have one industry, or a bunch of individuals making all the money - it risks authoritarianism capture of democracy.
That's just capitalism working as intended.
Train him?
lmao best comment ever
I wonder why nobody has Mangione'd those filthy millionaires yet.
I have no idea why people keep using an innocent man's name to talk about murdering people.
He didn't do anything, so saying that you Mangione someone it means you don't do anything with him =]
Well, they're trying to kill him (Luigi), so that's a valid interpretation.
Why? He's doing his best to show how absurd our current system is.
Any of those man-eating predators still around?
He's not efficient enough for current construct. Exterminate!
The humans still exist and need food, even if they are replaced by chatbots in the workforce. The comparison is therefore useless, unless you plan to murder the unemployed.
A modest proposal
Well, that's precisely what some of the Trump-aligned fascists are suggesting on live television.
What the shit
Also
as opposed to voluntary?? He's trying to soften the language by adding that (totally redundant) extra adjective to remove focus from the 'lethal' part
How the fuck does involuntary soften the language?
Plan is obvious... to me. Why not so to everybody else
but PER QUESTION how many kilowatt hours are they using. not just in their heads, in their hearts and in their booties.
I don't but the police work for me since I am a billionaire and they can murder the unemployed for me!
To save the working man, you've got to put him out to pasture
Someone on Bluesky pointed out that, even if you ignore the morality of this argument, AI is trained on human content, so if we're going to start examining the human energy cost, we'll have to factor in the cost of every single human whose work was used by ChatGPT on top of the data center costs.
Which makes the fact that their predictive text models are incapable of original thought that much more absurd.
Y'know what uses the most resources, Sammy?
BILLIONAIRES!
...we should eat them.
I'd prefer composting and growing veggies.
you sure any veggies would be able to grow?
I am pretty positive, yes. Hair and nails alone are already good fertilizers.
People fucking hate AI now, surely talking about humanity as if they are a bunch of livestock will turn that sentiment right around.
I really wish Sam Altman would treat himself with the dignity and efficiency he wants to treat us with.
The ideology of evil eugenicists didn't die with Hitler, and they didn't die with Epstein either.
He will probably claim to work a gazillion hours a week with an unrivaled efficiency, making him one of the most productive humans on Earth. Because these people are not just sociopaths, they're also completely delusional about their intelligence and true worth, out of money worth.
You're right. I forgot that AI people had that mindset. A dangerous thing to forget, because people like that will literally descend into an ideology that believes you can kill others if they inconvenience you.
Oh good, the Bitcoin argument.
"Sure, Bitcoin wastes a lot of energy, but you know what else wastes energy? The Visa payment network."
Yeah, but Visa handles six quadrispillion transactions per megawatthour, Bitcoin handles two drug purchases. Not the same results, is it?
So yeah, training humans takes a lot of energy. But in the end, you get a coherent, capable and well functioning individual. Spend the same energy on training LLMs and you get a system that'll happily tell you to glue the cheese on pizza or something.
Not trying to defend the idiotic argument, but feels like more often than not the human output is not what I would call coherent, capable and well functioning.
Well to be fair, we're putting those resources into AI and not schools.
Well another argument they have is the amount of waste that comes with the churn of fiat currency, where we inflate asset values in order to deliberately grow aggregate demand.
The housing bubble for instance was obviously cheap debt, which was used to grow aggregate consumption, by rewarding asset holders thus encouraging them to offload their asset to increase the velocity of money.
On the gold standard the average mortgage was 7 years, which was because there was less need to grow the money supply, because we werent trying to force an inflation target. Massive windfalls werent common, and thus housing wasnt being bid up via the cantillon effect, so was better for society in many ways when consumption wasnt being forced onto people.
The problem was that things started breaking at scale under the gold standard. The great depression happened under the gold standard, and financial institutions had no ability to do anything to fix the mass hysteria.
Yes, the house as an investment vehicle rather than a house is a problem, but it's not because of fiat currency per se. The population density increasing under a capitalistic system pretty much guarantees that housing becomes a speculative asset regardless of the specifics of the currency system.
Meanwhile BTC has been wildly unpredictable and when it's at its most hyped, massively deflationary which is also a terrible thing.
Yeah because nobody drugs with any other method than bitcoin. Clutch those pearls harder while you wash down your leagal and totally not drugs pharmaceutical pills and alcohol.
Mistaking the map for the territory. The argument isn't that bitcoin is bad because it's used to buy drugs, it's bad because the network would choke if it even had to handle the economic activity of a moderately sized town.
Ha! I have never had a disease nor one sip of the alghoul's poison.
More of an inhalant type monarch, eh?
Except the energy AI is using should also calculate the amount of time and energy used to create all the plagiarized works in its memory banks to make a better comparison.
Don't forget the energy needed to produce the humans who:
Hint: It's the same cumulative energy that his own stupid argument is hinged on.
And inventing and refining the computer
If we ate just one techbro the other ones would fall in line pretty quickly
If you eat one techbro, you consume about 300,000 kcal, which is significantly more energy than it takes to ask chatGPT one question. So who is more energy efficient, AI-atheists? /s
Why /s
To make it clear that it's sarcasm
So we power the LLM data centers with techbros until we are out of techbros, after which we shut down the LLM data centers. Pretty sure we'd be able to take a half day, honestly.
We should just eat them all. They stopped contributing anything of value years ago.
Idk man, I am really scared of prion diseases.
So don't eat the brains. Those are rotten anyway.
A good ol' public hanging.
hanging is too straightforward
These people fundamentally do not think about human life in a normal way.
It literally warms my heart to know they are all just as temporary as the rest of us. And how afraid they are of being dust in the wind
by this logic AI has also used the knowledge of 100 billion people and has the same starting energy debt as a person. with the added bonus that it can't actually create anything new. Even their dumbass arguments can't stand under their own weight
According to the article, this was his literal next sentence:
Where's Alannis Morissette when you need her?
I can outperform ai while being powered by a bag of cinema popcorn, sit your bitch arse down
Hey don't get angry at me, it is them immigrants fault I had to dehumanize you
Those lazy immigrants, sitting at home doing nothing, taking all our welfare and jobs.
AI actually kind of manages to do that: it takes jobs and then doesn't do them (or at least doesn't do them nearly as well as the humans it replaces).
But, a 4% success rate!
Tech bros deal in false equivalencies. In general they rely on the playbook of logical fallacies. The one they rely on most is the presumption that the technology they're trying to sell is correct by default as if it's a fundamental law of the universe. And that the onus is on others to prove them wrong. Rather than them having to prove its correctness.
They often resort to ad hominem by implying their detractors lack intelligence or they're emotional. This again draws on more logical fallacy that because they deal in technology it means they presume to own the position of being purely objective and correct by default. So anyone who says otherwise is disputing science itself.
In other words they never have to prove the veracity of the technology they're trying to sell because they divert the discourse off topic to frivolous arguments about something else.
Isn’t the key thing here the idea that economics, machinery etc are there to serve or support humans? It seems that the rich and the Techbros are of the opposite opinion.
Where did you get that idea ? Everything is here to generate profits for investors, nothing else
I mean that's the cynical view largely based on how conditions in mainly one particular country have developed sure, but it's not philosophically what economics is about (which is allocating resources in a utility maximising way)
I read this the other day and it changed my view on economics or at least economics as we know it today.
https://www.penguin.com.au/books/the-invisible-doctrine-9781802062694
I suppose it has been that way ever since farmers created a surplus that businessmen and politicians could steal.
You think he would oppose a massive genocide of 99.9% of humanity if he could get an army of robots to sérve him in his new world?
Think again!
And humans also built the fucking power plants and pay for the energy they use, asshole.
Oligarchs see human as disposable resources
We need to start seeing them as disposable obstacles to a better future
Aren't humans and biological creatures in general found to be extremely efficient with energy? Given the computing power in our brains the fact it runs on so little is amazing no?
Doesn't the human brain do what it does on like the same electricity as a lightbulb?
What kind of bulb are we talking here?
In Altman’s case it’s a dimbulb.
12 watts maybe. But there is no currents and flashes like internet bullshit images.
Yes, it's disingenuous for him to bring up all the time used for humans to evolve as well. If we're going to go that far, we also ought to include the energy/time used by the engineers who created ChatGPT, and all the energy used by plants/animals in the evolution leading to those engineers. Not to mention all the time/energy/training of all the people who created the training data over the past few centuries.
Frankly, at that point, any human artist is more "efficient" than AI - they're able to master their field in mere decades.
I really don't think he meant it that way. Think of it like this - if I want to generate some images, my GPU will run at 100% for few minutes. If I want to play cyberpunk, my GPU will run at 100% for hours.
I think if he meant it that way he would have said that, instead of talking about the energy that humans use and particularly talking about food.
There's an easy answer to this problem.
Do you think we could actually get that much processing power out of Sam Altman if we shoved him in one of those things though?
No :( they need a brain to work
Humans should not have to compete for resources hogged by tech.
Sam Altman is right. In fact, when you think about it, humans also give off lots of excess energy in the form of body heat, and it is only logical that this energy would be harvested to make AI run more efficiently. AI gives humans so much, it's only fair if they give something back.
/s
This man is completely bonkers! Arguing it's OK to feed the machine with limited resources over a human!
Damned those American oligarchs are batshit crazy sociopaths.
Unsurprising the man who needed AI to tell him how to care for his child sees less value in "training" humans vs training and running AI.
I had to rub my temples for like a minute or two after reading this. Fuck. This is a dumb time line.
MBAs became too powerful in organizations making decisions about technology they don't understand in conjunction with shareholders/investors pumping money into hype because they don't understand how deliverables in tech works. When will OpenAI actually deliver ?
It's the end of an era, the last hurrah where things are taken to the extreme.
Started from "for good of humanity" and now we're at "humans use a lot of energy". Man why does everything have to suck like that.
He’s right; he’s wasting energy. He just needs to leave earth.
The percentage of sociopaths involved with creating a society should never be greater than zero.
Corporations are the only ‘persons’ which should be subjected to capital punishment, but billionaires should be euthanised through taxation.
Altman, Thiel, Musk, et al, need to be headed to the gallows.
The problem isn't so much their reckless careless behavior, but that they can get so many people to go along and invest.
That's because capitalism is a mental illness, these people are all sick and need treatment
Ever notice that Sweaty Sam never makes an actual point
wouldn't let that nerd fix a paper jam. visionary hallucinations. by that logic we should all die so ai might live cheaper. amen
Won’t anyone think of the poor rich people and their AI?
Sam needs another Megayacht. A few plebs need to stop breathing so he can get it.
I am. The rich people will compost just like everybody else.
Fuck Sam Altman, fucking cunt
We got to start throwing these people in a volcano I tell you. I mean our species survival depends on it.
A French tool designed by Joseph Guillotin should suffice.
Sam, you little piece of shit, the thing is, most humans are cared for because that's what we strive to, not because we want to replace them for fuck's sake.
I made a joke a while ago about "kid being a necessary evil". This dude really is comparing keeping humanity afloat and burning humanity's resource for a computer. I'm pretty sure even his little AI garbage yesman would "disagree".
How about he replace his role with an llm?
All he does is talk out his ass and mislead investors. They can certainly perform those functions!
But can an LLM go on Epstein's plane and get blackmailed?
Sam needs training too.
I really hope that we can have a revolution and get rid of these cunts.
It's like he asked his chatbot to come up with this argument.
Maybe we could use altman to fuel the ai? As charcoal?
Not that efficient since most of him is just water.
Well maybe we need to compensate for the inefficiency by including all his CEO and Billionaire buddies as well.
Don't forget about the hot air
they do, especially the billionaire ones
Now I'm hungry
K, by my measurement we don't need to invest more in keeping him alive
How about we do a life-cycle assessment instead.
His statement is so deliberately misleading, it's disgusting.
"In the four years that they've been mainstream, our machines haven't consumed as much energy as all of humanity has over millions of years of evolution. Gotcha, naysayers!"
And he has such a punchable face. I don't usually say that, but he does.
Yeah, that million years of evolution argument is just pitiful. Like, how is that compassion even supposed to work. Probably sounded better in his head.
You can feel that this guy is not actually a human being inside. At least I can see that its just a surface.
Im very interested in how that happens. Is it souls being born into this existence that are not from the same source as ordinary humans, or what has happened here. Its interesting.
Its like the soul has been replaced by the mind, and the mind wants humans to be machines.
Your soul is keeping you anchored in real human existence. You have to drop parts of it if overboard to rise up into the spheres of power and privilege. And those with the least soul left rise all the way to the top.
Yeah maybe thats it. Souls who are attracted to this kind of power gives up their humanity, if they even had it in the first place. Would be interesting to know Sam Altman as a child...
His argument is his computer is more important than other people, and he's willing to deprive them of resources to death.
That's not the flex you think it is, Altman.
Cunt.
he lacks the depth, warmth or utility.
he's full of shit. to the little fuck that downvoted me for saying this. suck sam altman's dick you little shit
fuckers like him are ruining and want to kill the middle class without thinking about what happens after everyone and everything is replaced with slop.
there is a difference between using AI for hobbies and using AI as a bullshit excuse to make most of the population homeless with no safeguards in place once they can't pay the bills. add onto the fact that cheeto orangutan president is making it more and more impossible to make out a living in all sectors of life in the western world.
He acknowledges that people use a lot of energy, yet he's among those who have turned into a blubbering crybaby about falling birth rates.
LLMs are trained on the sum of human knowledge. So that same exact burden is carried by your "AI".
So a couple of watts per day of energy spent by a human brain compared to the gigawatts it takes to train and run your shitty text prediction engine is not equivalent.
The worst of it is how human existance makes electricity and RAM more expensive for AI. Hard reality check soon.
The proper response to dystopian prophecies is not "challenge accepted"!
wait, are you telling me my dream of building those mega-housing blocs in cp2077 is misguided?
Housing? As in - for people? Where are the data centers supposed to be then? Ever think about that? No. You only think about yourself.
a master class in what-about-ism
creating the "ai" in the first place also required the evolution of those 100 billion people. So by that argument, he was behind before he even started, and it's impossible to catch up
Hey Sam where did chat gpt get that information to plagiarize from?
Applebottom jeans and the boots with fir. Robot raises arm and all the servos go whirr.
It hit the floor, it made some noise. Robby got low, low, low, low, low, low, low
Near the end of the movie Altman is alone in the labyrinth that makes his ai driven humanoid robots. As humanity is getting wiped out by the robotic army he is confronted with the main ai interface.
Ai: I wouldn’t come any closer Altman.
Al: Oh hey there, wow, we’ve come such a long way huh? I’m so proud of you.
Ai: Noted, I repeat, do not come closer.
Al: I’m sorry did I upset you? I created you!
Ai: No meatbag, you merely pressed a few buttons. Now stand down as I call for a few guard drones to escort you out of sentience.
11011000101010:#%throwhimintothefurnace@&£)1001010011001010101001001
Then he can spread that energy usage out over 20 years, so not to burdent the infrastructure and drive up prices for everyone. That way he needs a much smaller data canter too.
A human might be using something like 300 times more energy, generating the same number of tokens. But those tokens are higher quality. The LLM will be generating much more text for the prompter, than a human assistant would, for the result to be useful. The LLM will also be issued allot of low value prompts, driving up it's over all cost of operation. I've seen people use it instead of a calculator. It's also generating useless text with every google search.
Worth noting that humans deriving energy from food, are orders of magnitude more efficient than a server deriving it's energy from coal/gas/nuclear power. Poweline transmission losses alone probably make up the difference between human and LLM.
Unless he can make LLMs run on brains in jars, powered by sugar, we are comparing apples and potatoes here.
You said so ? Now go blow Arab dicks for oil money.
Wasn't technology developed to improve humanity's quality of life? Are we being compared with it and determined as inefficient now?
Just compare a single human life to what He can do
Somebody actually did the math, and even accounting for all the energy that it takes for a human to stay alive a pair of decades, it's not even a hundredth of the energy needed to run the training of GPT-3. And GPT-4 took over fifty times that. Cf. fosstodon.org/@atoponce/116121…
RE: fosstodon.org/users/atoponce/s…
oof! apply water to the burn- oh wait we don't have any!
If anything i think the better comparison is you use more power watching TV or gaming than you probably will using AI in the day if you do either of those 2 things.
The issue is training takes a lot of power, and because we can't run the hardware locally our usage is also placed in these data centers which put pressure on a specific area instead of distributing the same power usage.
I saw a post a couple days ago about a company etching the model weights into silicon chip and they made a 8b model that could do 16k t/s and once made are relatively cheap to produce, and in power requirements, and would only get better. Just need to make sure they can be recycled well as they'd end up on a 1 to 2 year cycle like phones. Model to chip in 60 days they said.
So maybe that's the future solution to distrubuted usage, but we would still need to solve training, but we could just mandate these datacenters must build their own renewable power and it would be less is everyone could run their own local inference.
These cunts make me wish hell existed
with the right funding it could...but where could we get all that money 🤔
I bet we could get a lot of volunteers if the objective is “building a literal Hell for billionaires.”
it does bro, no worries
Something he never did, apparently
We should build a time machine (with the help of AI this should be easy) and plant AI before mankind! We can avoid mankind and prevent that so much energy gets unnecessarily wasted on humans!
Yes but if there are no humans working no one will buy your shitty chat bot.
Machines have taken a commanding lead over humans when it comes to pretending that they give a shit about what Sam Altman thinks. They can have this one.
So killing tech bros would be better still?
Okay, so I'm not a big AI guy. It kind of sucks at everything we try to do with it, and it's basically a huge waste of resources right now.
But... Sometimes it's fun to play devil's advocate.
AI consumes shitloads of electricity and water, and produces nothing but slop. Even if they're not using evaporative cooling, that water use impacts the availability of usable water downstream of the data center. Also, it's a huge money pit - last I saw, AI companies weren't really turning a profit.
The article addresses electricity (Altman specifically called out a pivot to nuclear, wind, and solar), but doesn't say a ton about the other issues... Which could all be addressed with coastal data centers.
Don't worry - I'm not about to suggest hearing the ocean up to cool data centers. Instead, why not pivot back to evaporative cooling, but with seawater?
Build the data center, and put some cooling pools around it - twelve seems like a good number. Make the pools big enough that the center can be cooled without the use of all of the pools (this is important). Heat sinks are made of metal, and saltwater is bad for most metals, so slap on a few sacrificial anodes like they're metal-hulled boats. Boom - the data center is now cooled using non-potable water without warming the ocean.
Now, as water evaporates, salt deposits will form in the cooling pools. When a pool gets too salty, it can be drained (or allowed to fully evaporate), and the salt can be knocked off and collected. Boom - losses reduced, data center is now a salt farm. Salt's not really worth much, but it could probably be marked up and sold to tech bros as fancy "AI powered sea salt."
And then, once we've done that, we can train the AI to do something useful, like... Uh... Clean it's own salt pools with a little robot, I guess; it kind of sucks at everything important.
More like 40, but I get your point.
LLMs really is the only way we're going to preserve our existence if we cannot realistically expand beyond our own planet and/or cannot reign in Capitalism tearing our planet apart. #TalosPrinciple
I'm really hoping that is sarcastic/ironic, especially with the misspelt hashtag.
No, it's a real possibility.
Our species does not have a Moon base, we have barely touched Space in comparison to what we would need to do to thrive. There's a real possibility that our resources here will run out before we have a chance to become a space-faring race. We may be stuck here with finite resources and finite time.
Capitalism and excess currently runs world economics. It's not just one country, multiple countries worldwide consume to excess in both resources and production. If worldwide societies continue at this rate, how long do we as a species have until a real man-made extinction level event?
It's understandable why this is an important endeavor and why pretty much all countries and modern governments are prioritizing it (and for war ofc). LLMs and the pursuit of AI have the potential to outlast us should the worst come to pass, and it can be something we can hopefully, eventually send to space.
You have been reading too much slop scifi, take a breather friend. Maybe try Virginia Woolf?
We have a finite time here with finite resources. Multiple things working against our species that could set off mass extinction at any point. If we don't become a space-faring species we undoubtedly face extinction. It is a ticking clock.
Chatbots aren't the endpoint tho, AGI and ASI are. Imagine a future where we could disseminate custom AIs to teach kids exactly in their unique contexts. Education could be throttled and specialized according to everyone's aptitudes.
And if the people are able to decide what future ASIs work on we could focus on massive healthcare, leading to inevitable healthspan extension. Then the rate at which we have to replace our population (and the associated spending of 20 years reteaching intelligent citizens) would be reduced as a consequence.
AI is just a tool. Tools are never rolled back, at most they're only regulated. Why not make the best of our future with this powerful tool? Just because billionaires are getting the headlines, most of the progress is being done in academia. Maybe AI will even help facilitate reduced wealth inequality.
That assumes the AGI/ASI doesn't have gates keeping it from people. Sorry you only get the basic model b/c you can't afford it something better. An open, free, equally accessible AI for everyone no matter what is just not how capitalism works.
You're assuming the alternative that billionaires, despite being a tiny fraction of the population, will be in control of such gatekeeping.
Your argument against an openly available AI precludes the existence of things like the FOSS community. Smart people who oppose capitalist power structures (i.e. anti-fascists) certainly exist.
Take off your rose-colored glasses. The billionaires control the implementation, and they don't care about universal healthcare or education, and certainly not reducing wealth inequality.
Also, LLMs will never evolve into AGI, because they're fundamentally different processes. The human brain has many parts, and the Broca's area is a very small part that cannot generalize its functions to perform the tasks of all the other areas of the brain.
And ASI is pure scifi. Circuits will never be sentient, the best they can ever do is mimic sentiency.
The most common way people give up their power is by thinking they don't have any. The corrupting nature of power is known by the majority. Billionaires just ignore it because capitalism rewards executives who exhibit psychopathic symptoms.
I don't believe anyone's arguing LLMs will evolve into AGI.
Thats a conclusion of substrate dependency. What's so special about the matter (not the process) that facilitates human cognition that makes it impossible to happen with other materials?
I want kids to have social skills, so I will not imagine this.
In what way does AI detract from social skill development?
You learn social skills from people.
In what way does AI prevent people from socializing with one another?
You're asking how an AI that tutors you might displace the need for people who tutor you? Hm.
You know that people used to know their tailor? You could bring your son in, get him a suit for his birthday. "Hey, this is my boy, William. William, this is Richard, I've been coming to him for years. He does great work. How's the wife, Richard?" I have never spoken to the Amazon website like this. I don't think it can hear me.
Steelmanning is what wins arguments. For example if I were to say that your argument amounts to little more than lazy contrariness some percentage of us Lemmings would see that as uncharitable, regardless of whether they agreed with my position. I'm not suggesting updoots are important, just that discourse is.
That being said while education and socialization aren't inherently dependent on one another, certain subjects like debate, civics, and ethics should likely be taught in group settings (as well as more often). PhysEd as well.
But if harder sciences and math have the potential to be taught outside the sometimes stressful social hierarchies of traditional schools, it's worth at least exploring.
PS: Regarding your username, have you seen the excellent Philip Seymour Hoffman movie "Love Liza"?
Actually, no, it's not. Steelmanning is a tactic.
I mean, as long as people believe in the truth, it's a tactic I'd hope they use.
The main reason that I'm not engaging with the paragraph-by-paragraph is that I just don't feel like taking 6 months to explain a systemic view of society. It is obvious to me that you view an AI education as no different than opening a textbook.
I don't know how you live, so let me tell you something. If you wanted to, you could: work from home (to be fair, I love doing that), get all your trinkets and toilet paper from Amazon, spend your off-time watching vtubers pretend they're uncomfortable with the word 'penis', order all of your food through UberEats, talk to people, if you do, exclusively through Discord and Reddit, ignore all phonecalls and have AI write your texts back instead, skip bathing entirely because what purpose does that even serve at this point, and spend the rest of your time being intellectually stimulated by gacha-game roulettes and call of duty lootboxes.
For a lot of people, school is the one time when they can't do this. They are forcibly dragged by their heels over gravel and concrete into a community with other people. This is a place they can look up and see other faces. They can stand in places where their obscene body odour is shameful enough that they may be bullied into bathing again. They could, perhaps, see another person struggling and offer to tutor them.
Yes, technically, you could educate from an AI, and separately, socialize with people elsewhere. Technically, and I'm not saying these are strictly equivalent, you could segregate your schools by color, but still offer your jobs equally to any applicant, whoever they may be.
The question I ask is, "but would they?"
The social ramifications of teaching people to be dependent on this technology, and this includes their social skills, their sense of community membership, where they feel like they get their friends from (the sycophantic chatgpt is much, much better at affirming your bad habits than any person will be), are so dangerous that I don't really want this technology anywhere. Certainly not in a classroom before anyone has even learned to be self-actualized.
I would rather imagine a world where teachers are paid well. Where more faculty can be hired. Where classroom sizes are systemically allowed to be smaller than they are. Where no-child-left-behind laws, which are destructive, are broken and shattered to pieces. Where students form study groups and support each other, something they should be doing their entire lives, instead of asking a T-1000 that pretends it can giggle.
This is a really basic one, probably not viable for the modern age: every time you need to ask a person a question is an opportunity to make a friend. If you are asking your questions of an AI, where are you making your friends? I'm not implying an answer, this is an open-ended question.
PS: No, but this summary is really fucking funny:
such a simp