211
How do I explain my reluctance to use generative AI in good faith? (sopuli.xyz)
submitted 10 months ago by to c/asklemmy@lemmy.world
149 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I want to let people know why I'm strictly against using AI in everything I do without sounding like an 'AI vegan', especially in front of those who are genuinely ready to listen and follow the same.

Any sources I try to find to cite regarding my viewpoint are either mild enough to be considered AI generated themselves or filled with extremist views of the author. I want to explain the situation in an objective manner that is simple to understand and also alarming enough for them to take action.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 0 points 10 months ago* (2 children)

The fact that a gou data center uses more power than one that does not does not matter at all.

You're completely missing the point.

The sum total of power usage for all non ai data centers is an ecological issue whether ai data centers use more, the same, or less power.

All data centers have an ecological footprint, all use shitloads of power, and it doesn't matter if one kind is worse than any other kind.

This is exactly what I was trying to point out in my comment.

If I take a shit in a canoe that's a problem. Not an existential one but a problem. If I dump another ten pounds of shit in the canoe it doesn't mean the first pound of shit goes away.

If I dump two pounds of shit in the canoe then the first pound of shit is still in the canoe. The first pound of shit doesn't stop being an issue because now there are two more.

You can have an issue with shit in the canoe on principle, which is fine. Then it's all problematic.

But if you're fine with having one pound of shit in the canoe, and find with three, but not okay with eleven, then the issue isn't shit in the canoe, it's the amount of shit in the canoe. They're distinct issues.

But it's NOT intellectually honest to be okay with having one pound of shit in the canoe and not being okay with the other two. You can't point at the two pounds of shit and say: this abominable! While ignoring the other pound of shit. Because it's all shit.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

    But it’s NOT intellectually honest to be okay with having one pound of shit in the canoe and not being okay with the other two. You can’t point at the two pounds of shit and say: this abominable! While ignoring the other pound of shit. Because it’s all shit.

    Sure, because that's a terrible analogy.

    Gen AI data centers don't just require more power and space, they require so much more power and space that they are driving up energy costs in the surrounding area and the data centers are becoming near impossible to build.

    People didn't randomly become "anti-data center". Many of them are watching their energy bills go up. I'm watching as they talk about building new coal plants to power "gigawatt" data centers.

    And it's all so you can have more fucking chat bots.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 10 months ago

    When a family in the global south uses coal to cook their food, they release CO2. When a billionaire flies around the continent on a private jet, they also release CO2.

    Do you consider the two to be equivalent in need or output?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent