Great timing and phrasing. “Be slow about slop development ooor… Burn everyone and everything!”
Clear answer for me - everything else wins over pointless “AI”
Making collages out of human excrement wins over pointless “AI” for me.
Even tRump’s?
Yeah, especially if it’s smeared on his face
Is… Is there a line or what
Even the hyperloop?
Anything that makes rich people look stupid and blow money is good, yes.
So you’re proAI or what? 😉
…
…
…
Shit. You got me with that.
But I’m more pro-OceanGate.
I’m pretty sure “squish” is the exact opposite of “blow”
Wait fuck.
Does not and will never exist, so it isn’t “something” .
Yeah, but what if people suddenly started spending money on it? Would you prefer investment bankers threw billions into that sinkhole or AI?
I would prefer they sunk money into nearly anything other than AI.
Yeah, but what if people suddenly started spending money on fucking Jurassic Park? What about ai then, huh?
Can’t say I’m excited about any of these options. I think we need a movie about hyperloop failing catastrophically to make the comparison easier. There already are lots of movies about AI taking over the world and a handful of movies where dinosaur experiments go horribly wrong. Haven’t seen anything about a hyperloop disasters.
Would be cool though. Imagine a hyperloop getting stuck under the pacific ocean. If you open the door, the vacuum will kill you. If you somehow manage that, you’re still under a bezillion tonnes of water, so good luck with that. If you still somehow survive, and make it to the surface, you’re still bezillion km away from shore. The protagonist of that movie is going to need some ridiculous amounts of plot armor, or we’re going to roll the credits after 15 minutes.
Hey I love the money hole. My father worked two jobs so he’d have money to dump in the money hole!
Well, thought more of the better stuff like nature, not Musk’s brainfarts
Easiest choice of my life
Don’t threaten me with a good time.
Right? Talk about not being able to read the room.
Hmmmmm lower electric bills for our countries electorate OR giant buildings they hate that pollute their water, give them ill health from noise pollution, and take their jobs?
Damn I don’t know, let me ask chatgpt.
They said they’d love me more if I syntax error input new token so that’s what I live by
I mean, we must choose. Just not in favor of slopcenters burning through resources for highly dubious advantages.
I’d pay good money to rid the world of AI
Not true at all. AI can and should be running on renewables alone.
We need that for more important stuff, especially because the effort to replace fossil fuels with renewables is lagging. You don’t get to just add new huge energy uses while the old ones haven’t been moved to renewables.
AI use and data centres are definitely being added too quickly.
Hence, the title of the post here. More AI => more coal and methane burning.
The implication you write is a choice, not a necessity. Corrected:
More AI => more energy consumption, where energy is any of coal, methane, solar, nuclear, hydro, wind, etc.
Note your unjustified limitation to coal and methane.
More AI => more energy consumption, where energy is any of coal, methane, solar, nuclear, hydro, wind, etc.
And have you looked at the state of the others, the investment plans, and how long it takes?
Yeah the obstacles are the fossil fuel industry’s PR and lobbying efforts to slow them down. Very much like what you’re doing here and now.
Yes, Euria and many others in Europa are already doing it.
The Problem is not AI but how Datacenters are used in USA.
And closed-loop cooling. But then it will still emit heat, which should be captured in a downstream process.
As long as fossil fuel energy is put on the grid, there is no such thing as running on renewables alone.
For every Watt of green energy you use, someone else uses one less and that gap gets filles by fossil fuels.Grids are much more manageable than you think.
I mean that’s an easy choice, but also no fucking way. Rich pricks would pay for data centers even if they had to run them exclusively off renewables. This is a bluff.
Lol easy choice
Cool, fuck off then.
No we don’t. I’m pretty sure we’ll be able to miss all the climate goals even if we ban data centres.
Most probably. But not by such a high margin. The energy consumption of datacenters is completely insane.
Its not completely Insane for Datacenters or Supercomputers in Europa. Also our Supercomputers are always first in Green500, unlike USAs!
I just wish we could convince tptb into building that much grid capacity in renewables. For the citizenry. Not for buisness.
I mean I’m aware of a few projects, but like nothing on datacenter scale
What I find interesting is that a lot of these changes which are attributed to the purportedly “inevitable” changes associated with AI (or partly with its not-adoption), are real consequences of climate change.
- loss of employment? Check.
- profound change to living conditions? Check.
- loss of labour productivity - including knowledge work? Check.
- threathening the stability of the world-wide financial system? Check.
- increasing likelihood of war? Check.
- threathening even the continuity of human civilization? Check.
- threathening the capability to compete on national scales if the change is not reponded to swiftly by governments? Check.
- Correlated with obscene amounts of wealth concentration, impoverishing the huge majority of people, and disintegrating societies? Check.
It’s as if AI is used as a distraction. Like the “accusation in a mirror” pattern.
How else do you think they will get a one world government? Cause the problems, depopulate the “undesirables”, cause conflict, and offer a solution to fix what you have created. Not a hard concept. The only way people will accept a totalitarian techno-fascist one world government is with an overwhelming catastrophe.
So no AI then, eh! Eh?
False dichotomy
Yeah we can have a global climate disaster without AI too dudes. We have options [jazz hands emoji dot png]
politico
ewww
