Comment on Why We Need An Anti-AI Movement Too

<- View Parent
drdabbles@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

You fail to see a problem with increasing power demands by 10-20x beyond their existing consumption rates? While the world burns around you? Alright Niro, enjoy your fiddle.

If AI is useful enough that people are willing to pay for the electricity it consumes, then they will pay for that electricity and the generating capacity will be funded by that.

Let me change your sentence, then you try it on for size and see how you like it.

“If CFCs are useful enough that people are willing to pay for them, then they will pay for those CFCs and the hole in the ozone will be an acceptable consequence”. I could go on with Asbestos, lead in gasoline, literally anything that releases a greenhouse gas.

And again, you clearly can not conceive of what you’re talking about. The cost for such generation is beyond reasonable, and you’ve entirely missed that point. Not a surprise, really, but you’ve missed it all the same. Guessing the next word isn’t useful enough to humanity to burn the world to the ground, but it IS something that companies can sell to simple rubes that have been conned into thinking that the illusion is real magic. And we know what companies will do for money.

This is a trivial supply and demand situation.

It isn’t. Because as it is already, these systems are behemoths that consume insane amounts of energy, they are not making enough money to pay for themselves, they are not serving a real utility that provides value, and still the drooling masses use them for their amusement. Either way, you’ve proven you don’t understand the technical aspects of this, the consumption aspects of it, the as-implemented state of the industry, or the scale of demand induced by companies trying to make a buck. So I think the value of this conversation is about the value of any of these rube goldberg guessing machines.

source
Sort:hotnewtop