AI is much more than the quality of the code. It’s also about stealing the knowledge, overusing Earth’s resources like water and power, pollution, killing consumer computers through RAM and memory shortage in general - the very same computers that run Linux -, making average people more ignorant, risking another gigantic bubble burst and so on.
And as a cherry on the top, comparing AI to compilers. Riiiight.
Have you actually looked into the real environmental impact of AI is compared to, say, eating meat, driving a car, or taking a yearly plane flight? It’s a rounding error. Have you looked into the numbers? Compared the environmental impact of your AI use to the environmental impact of taking a yearly vacation on a plane?
The RAM shortage is real, but very temporary. Check the news today! Chip stocks like Sk Hynix are way down because people are worried about over-production. The fact that a new technology caused a temporary shortage in a resource just isn’t even a coherent argument against the technology. There’s discussion to be had here about whether we should as a civilization reserve some resources for other industries. That’s a discussion we could have. But the idea that AI caused a temporary shortage in RAM, so that makes it bad is… like, really ridiculous? You must see that that doesn’t even make sense as an argument?
These are not arguments that hold up to scrutiny. You should consider whether you accepted these arguments because you looked into the details and they actually make sense, or if you accepted them because they’re telling you what you want to believe.
You’re free to hate GenAI all you like as far as I’m concerned. Just be honest about your reasons, and don’t pretend it’s about the environment if you don’t care enough to even look at the numbers.
Sure, but surely the data centers illegally running gas turbines in Memphis and Vineland, New Jersey are causing problems that wouldn’t exist without the current hype cycle.
Do you think that’s a reasonable reason to hate gen AI?
There are absolutely issues around the rollout of AI. I haven’t seen anyone disagree with that. That’s just not a good argument for being opposed to the technology. That might be a reasonable reason to hate xAI or Microsoft (and I do!). It’s definitely a reasonable reason to have concerns about how we’re doing this. You should be concerned.
It’s not a reasonable reason to hate the technology itself.
To be clear, I haven’t downvoted you.
I think it’s a valid reason to hate the technology but well below others like deskilling, proliferation of spam and propaganda, etc. If these data centers were all run on solar power then it’d be less of an issue.
Basically you are saying that me buying and throwing a plastic bottle in to the nature is fine, since one bottle is nothing. Also I’m sure that (new) data centers run on few AAA batteries.
Listen, I’ve got nothing against you hating AI. There’s lots of valid reasons to be concerned, especially with the implications for the future of jobs and work. The way corporations are adopting AI is legitimately concerning.
Just don’t pretend it’s about the environment when it’s not. That isn’t just an unconvincing argument, it hurts the environmental movement generally.
It’s the plastic straws all over again. You understand that the stupid straws debate did the environment no favors right? Fighting AI as an environmental issue is much worse because the AI is coming, and you will lose that fight. If you’re arguing for more controls about water and power use, I’m with you. If you’re arguing for a carbon tax, I will sing your praises. If you’re trying to fight the idea of AI itself, and pretending that it’s about the environment, that’s where I have a problem.
AI is much more than the quality of the code. It’s also about stealing the knowledge, overusing Earth’s resources like water and power, pollution, killing consumer computers through RAM and memory shortage in general - the very same computers that run Linux -, making average people more ignorant, risking another gigantic bubble burst and so on. And as a cherry on the top, comparing AI to compilers. Riiiight.
Have you actually looked into the real environmental impact of AI is compared to, say, eating meat, driving a car, or taking a yearly plane flight? It’s a rounding error. Have you looked into the numbers? Compared the environmental impact of your AI use to the environmental impact of taking a yearly vacation on a plane?
The RAM shortage is real, but very temporary. Check the news today! Chip stocks like Sk Hynix are way down because people are worried about over-production. The fact that a new technology caused a temporary shortage in a resource just isn’t even a coherent argument against the technology. There’s discussion to be had here about whether we should as a civilization reserve some resources for other industries. That’s a discussion we could have. But the idea that AI caused a temporary shortage in RAM, so that makes it bad is… like, really ridiculous? You must see that that doesn’t even make sense as an argument?
These are not arguments that hold up to scrutiny. You should consider whether you accepted these arguments because you looked into the details and they actually make sense, or if you accepted them because they’re telling you what you want to believe.
What about those of us who don’t eat meat or fly on a plane ever? Are we allowed to hate GenAI?
You’re free to hate GenAI all you like as far as I’m concerned. Just be honest about your reasons, and don’t pretend it’s about the environment if you don’t care enough to even look at the numbers.
Sure, but surely the data centers illegally running gas turbines in Memphis and Vineland, New Jersey are causing problems that wouldn’t exist without the current hype cycle.
Sure.
Do you think that’s a reasonable reason to hate gen AI?
There are absolutely issues around the rollout of AI. I haven’t seen anyone disagree with that. That’s just not a good argument for being opposed to the technology. That might be a reasonable reason to hate xAI or Microsoft (and I do!). It’s definitely a reasonable reason to have concerns about how we’re doing this. You should be concerned.
It’s not a reasonable reason to hate the technology itself.
To be clear, I haven’t downvoted you. I think it’s a valid reason to hate the technology but well below others like deskilling, proliferation of spam and propaganda, etc. If these data centers were all run on solar power then it’d be less of an issue.
Or with moderately competent community involvement and regulation. Fortunately we’re waking those up… kinda…
Basically you are saying that me buying and throwing a plastic bottle in to the nature is fine, since one bottle is nothing. Also I’m sure that (new) data centers run on few AAA batteries.
I didn’t say that.
Listen, I’ve got nothing against you hating AI. There’s lots of valid reasons to be concerned, especially with the implications for the future of jobs and work. The way corporations are adopting AI is legitimately concerning.
Just don’t pretend it’s about the environment when it’s not. That isn’t just an unconvincing argument, it hurts the environmental movement generally.
It’s the plastic straws all over again. You understand that the stupid straws debate did the environment no favors right? Fighting AI as an environmental issue is much worse because the AI is coming, and you will lose that fight. If you’re arguing for more controls about water and power use, I’m with you. If you’re arguing for a carbon tax, I will sing your praises. If you’re trying to fight the idea of AI itself, and pretending that it’s about the environment, that’s where I have a problem.
But Ed Zitron makes me feel fuzzy and warm when he name calls everyone and therefore he must be right