HazardousBanjo@lemmy.world 6 days ago
The extreme damage to the environment they cause made me firmly against them. Add to that the destruction of the RAM and GPU markets, poisoning people’s water, skyrocketing cost of living, their use for mass surveillance, etc.
I’d honestly impose very strict environmental regulations and usage regulations. I’d also impose regulations preventing AI from replacing humans, given all AI isn’t reliable enough to do that in virtually any field.
BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 6 days ago
This argument just proves you’re thinking with your emotions and completely ignoring logic. You’re simply repeating what you heard without any sort of critical thinking involved.
“The extreme damage to the environment they cause”
Like you don’t own a car, eat meat, or heat your home.
The environmental damage from AIs doesn’t even amount to a fraction of a percent of the pollution and environmental damage you cause simply by existing on this earth.
There are plenty of good reasons to dislike AI, but anyone who starts with environmental reasons is being played so hard they don’t even know it.
HerrVorragend@lemmy.world 6 days ago
Sounds like you are the one being played.
Transport, food and heating are not required because they are fun or nice to have. They are means to survive.
Energy and water consumption of data centers are different because the product (AI slop and best guesses) is NOT required to survive.
Sorry for existing (not sorry)
Apepollo11@lemmy.world 6 days ago
There is a point there, though.
American cars are much less efficient than European ones.
The amount of water required for AI data centres worldwide is more than an order of magnitude lower than the water required for just corn in the US alone. Only a small fraction of which actually gets used for food.
The average energy usage per person in the US is nearly three times higher than someone in the UK.
The environmental cost of data centres is absolutely a concern, but we shouldn’t forget the US alone wastes more energy and resources than are used by data centres worldwide.
HazardousBanjo@lemmy.world 6 days ago
I’ll reply to this because I think it fits in refuting your greater point:
No, there isn’t.
I, as a mere peasant, have only the power to vote for a better system. Something I often don’t even have as we have a dualopoly of right wing political parties in America, and probably won’t ever have a fair election again regardless at this point.
The billionaires who are putting up these AI data centers, poisoning our water at unprecedented rates, spiking electricity usage and costs at unprecedented rates, polluting our environment at unprecedented rates, are doing this entirely at their own will. They have the power to create major change. They’re using that power for evil.
This is a false equivalence. Especially when you remember its the same hyper-rich fucks that made America rely on cars, and made our cars inefficient gas guzzlers.
BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 6 days ago
Do me a favour. Go look up the energy use per person for me in Germany, Spain, or the UK. Then go look up the energy usage per person in the USA or Canada and tell me again how necessary it is that transport, food, and heating are required energy use at the levels that currently happen in North America. You can repeat that same look from the “good” countries I listed to even lower use areas like Lithuania who still manage to heat and feed themselves on even less.
The way we live here is wasteful beyond belief, and the total value of that waste makes global AI energy usage look like a rounding error on one of the decimal points.
I’ll even make it easy for you by giving you a link to a page that has these values. ourworldindata.org/energy-production-consumption
HerrVorragend@lemmy.world 6 days ago
You are still arguing a moot point.
Could and should we, in the western world, be more sustainable? Absolutely yes!
But do you think, that even MORE energy consumption for something as useless and flawed as current AI systems are is in any way justified?
Even if it is just a blip on the radar compared to energy that is used to survive, it is still more load that comes on top of current usage.
How much sense would it make to undertake efforts to reduce the energy that is used to live while at the same time using more energy to power data centers that mostly benefit some guys who bet on the usefullness of AI, even against common sense?
HazardousBanjo@lemmy.world 6 days ago
Said just before you vomit some Redditor ass, fedora tipping neck bearded bullshit but I’ll let you continue.
Omg the dipshit is unironically doing the meme. Holy shit.
Image
Hey dumbfuck, driving a car in America and heating my home in the winter isn’t a fucking option, its a necessity to live. You also have to be fucking delusional to think my collective pollution, meat eating included, is even slightly comparable to these power chugging, water and air poisoning AI data centers that are entirely optional to build and run, by the way.
Again, source? Or are you just regurgitating what you heard Sam Altmann say while you were grargling his nuts?
BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 6 days ago
Total Datacenter energy use globally is about 1.5% of total Electricity use, which electricity usage itself only makes up about 20% of total global energy use. All Datacenter use isn’t even AI use, it’s every single datacenter holding up the internet from Netflix to Amazon to the Wix page created for your home business.
ourworldindata.org/…/data-centers-share-electrici… ourworldindata.org/energy-production-consumption
So again, AI energy use/pollution is a small fraction of a single percent of overall use. You’ve been lied to, now you need to ask WHY you’re being lied to about AI energy use and pollution being a problem.
You’re also absolutely wrong about heating and transportation being necessities in their current form. There are real choices you can make to drastically reduce your footprint on the environment including things like living in a smaller home, or with more people under the same roof. Those choices can quite literally reduce your individual heating requirements by 70-90%, and often those housing options are located in higher density urban locations where public transit, walking, and cycling are significantly easier to do. Practically everyone in the world could live in Cities and realize these efficiencies, there’s no real reason stopping that from happening other than personal choice. People in North America have just normalized this ultra-spread out suburban bullshit that’s literally costing us the planet.
Doomsider@lemmy.world 6 days ago
Why are you guessing when there is a lot of information available?
hanwhadatacenters.com/…/what-are-the-power-requir…
AI data center power demand will surge 160% by 2030, requiring 68 gigawatts of capacity compared to 10 gigawatts in 2025.
1 gigawatt is equivalent to about the energy usage for 800,000 homes. That is 8 millions homes right now projected to be 54 million homes of electricity in the next 4 years an increase of 580%
You have the gal to try and blame a single end user for their consumption when faced with this? You are clearly being disingenuous.
How much pollution does 68 gigawatt make!? Anywhere from 300-600 million metric tons of C02. This doesn’t include all the other pollution this energy generation will make. Just the C02.
“China makes one-third of all global carbon dioxide emissions, emitting roughly 13 billion metric tons annually. By contrast the United States, emits about 4.6 billion metric tons a year.”
Once again, just the C02 and wow. I am sure it is all the suburban populations fault in the US. Man you act like a corporate shill trying to blame pollution on the individual to shift the blame. Acting so dumb it hurts.
medium.com/…/carbon-footprints-the-individual-vs-…
“according to a groundbreaking 2017 report by the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) and Climate Accountability Institute, just 100 companies were responsible for over 70% of global industrial greenhouse gas emissions since 1988.”
People need to do there part to reduce waste and people in North America definitely produce more than average. Pretending they are the problem is pure bullocks though.
acchariya@lemmy.world 4 days ago
Yes, and me burning tires in my backyard accounts for an even smaller portion of global emissions, so why does my HOA make such a big deal of it?
Lumidaub@feddit.org 6 days ago
Participate, society, very smart, etc. Top notch.