Comment on UK government suggests deleting files to save water

dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

• QuoVadisHomines@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  What’s even more infuriating is the numbers of people who fail to recognize that all of these companies sell these goods and services to consumers and it is those consumers who can reduce the demand.

  source

  • AnyOldName3@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    In the case of AI, even if consumers actively try and avoid products with AI, it’s difficult. There are studies showing customers are generally less likely to buy a product if it’s described as having AI features, so the overall market demand is already for consumer products to have less AI. The demand companies are catering to is from investors, who don’t need to care about whether it’s viable to sell anything until after the bubble pops.

    source
  • dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    It’s virtually impossible to exist online these days without generative AI bullshit being shoved in your face with no means to opt-out. It’s clearly not consumers driving this so-called “demand,” because savvy people don’t want this to begin with and never did. Rather, it’s the desperate speculative hype around this dumb nonproduct that’s causing big businesses to set electricity and money on fire with AI slop to no tangible benefit.

    A saner response from the UK government would be to tell these companies to either power their AI datacenters with renewables or get out, rather than trying to guilt trip individuals over, of all the goddamned stupid things, undeleted emails.

    source
  • machiavellian@lemmy.ml ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    There was/is a demand for slavery. Should we wait for these people to realize that maybe owning slaves is not okay and morally wrong? Or should we just outright ban slavery and not give two fucks how “the market forces” view such action? You tell me.

    source

    • QuoVadisHomines@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      That’s a false equivalence.

      source

      • machiavellian@lemmy.ml ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

        Your argument is, correct me if I’m wrong, that the demand for product X always necessetates its production/supply and that supply will cease when there is no more demand.

        A valid argument based on basic market economic principles.

        I argue that there are times, when the demand for something does not outweigh the cost incurred (by the society) from the production and supply of a product. Meaning there are cases, such as this one, when it is almost impossible to decrease demand and thus influence the production which in turn would decrease the cost incurred by the society. In my view, the State has to protect foremost its citizenry, not ginormous enterprises. If this protection means going against “market forces”, then so be it.

        Both “products” cause harm to society while only a few benefit, so no, it was not a false equivalence.

        But then again, I could be mistaken and feel free to correct me on anything. :))

        source