535
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 24 Jun 2026
535 points (97.3% liked)
Fuck AI
7459 readers
1542 users here now
"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"
A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.
AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
On a plane? Hmmm
We still meet for climate change conferences. Like, no one figured out zoom conferences and work from home.
I wonder what responses I get for saying this, but nowadays both (as in zoom conference vs in person conference) is possible and both has upsides and downsides.
Online conferences are great to just listen to a specific talk, but other than that in person conferences are just a nicer experience. You can more freely just chat with other scientists, often there is a social evening where you randomly meet people you may not have thought about contacting before.
Now, should you travel around the globe every year several times just for that? Probably not. But in some fields there is one big conference every other year and it hugely benefits you as a scientist to attend these. Sometimes that means travelling from Europe to Oceania.
I see some people already taking issue with it in the comments, but I have also been to conferences that helped create partnerships that would not have happened otherwise. I'm not trying to suggest it's worth the emissions or anything, but I agree that being physically present is more conducive to making those connections.
I think a helpful thing would be if people stopped sending people that are just doing it to check it off a list and be done with it. The idea that attending a conference in and of itself is some kind of development is wrong, and people should only go if they're actually interested in participating in the exchange of ideas.
People doing presentations almost invariably have a façade on and what they're saying is either carefully vetted to avoid giving offense and/or is done with the purpose of projecting a very specific impression and/or generating a very specific response.
When it comes to making up your mind about somebody and their ideas, watching a presentation at a conference it's just slightly better than watching a politican on TV, which is about the most staged, carefully managed image of a person you can get.
IMHO, even as difficult as it is for introverts, the best way to discover good people with open minds and interesting ideas is when casually chatting with other equally anonymous attendees and that's not something possible via video-conference.
this made me realize I've only ever been to conferences (in either supply chain or data) because a job made me and I've only ever seen it as a chore. Even attending talks is only to be able to take notes, type notes and send them to colleagues as part of work.
I always see it as a chance to find a better position than what I’m currently in. When business people talk about networking, these conferences are where the initial contact happen.
I mean if it's a pro-climate change conference, go right ahead. You're backing the winning team anyway, so GG.
seems like every conference in the bay area, is large, and mostly about AI. other stem conference seem to have vanished from SF, replaced by AI slop companies.
Now I'm curious about what you'd think about VR conferences, wouldn't something like that combine the benefits of both, a more personal remote experience without the need of transporting everyone to a center?
Now imagine trying to teach every 60 year old who is an expert in their field how to use VR. Or how to make them accessible to low vision/blind people, or people with motion sickness. Or even just making the equipment needed to attend available to every audience member.
Fun fact, we have a mixed reality (guided) tour of the city. People can borrow some 3D glasses and walk around and see how the streets looked in 1887. And I regularly see a lot of random 60yo people walk around like zombies with those glasses. So it's obviously possible. Though I suspect there's a difference between people who paid money for it / are willing. And people who have to do something (for work).
And it's probably uncomfortable to wear them for extended time, like a 6h conference track.
How many people with those issues are traveling to this convention though? Besides motion sickness and physical disability, there's not much limiting those who can already afford the travel and ticket cost as they could also afford a $300 VR headset. Or perhaps a better solution is that it could be done at the same time as the in person convention to grab a additional audience and to lessen the physical costs and load overall. Sorry if my rambling sounds dumb, it was just an idea I didn't think fully through that I just thought talking out would give me better perspective on.
Adding greater possibility of virtual attendance could be a cool change assuming it is viable from a cost perspective
But folks who are not able to use VR in some way or another, be it disability or technological illiteracy, are still valuable parts of the conversation on climate change, so trying to do it all that way seems iffy to me
On the discussion more broadly, personally I find communication via video call about a million times harder than in person. I get that thats not the case for everyone but the communication is literally the entire point of having a conference like that. Trying to do it all over zoom seems like a good way to handicap thw effectiveness of conferences on a really important subject.
Maybe thats cause I have some auditory processing issues, maybe its because of social anxiety or neurodivergence and feeling dependent on lots of social information thats hard to read via video call to understand what people are communicating, but I think that kinda just adds to the accessibility being functionally important point, I imagine there are lots of neurodivergent folks in research. But maybe video calls are much easier for other people 🤷🏻♂️
And we still burn because we think it's ok. We think there are exceptions. "Just a bit" x billions of people and voila! Here we are.
...even from the people who know better.
And we still have trains and boats
Does the company you're employed at always happily give you how many extra days you need to take a boat or to ride a train instead of taking a plane? Lucky you, I can promise you that's not the case everywhere.
Like sure, you could insist on taking the cleanest transportation method available but that's definitely putting yourself on the chopping block and while starving to death due to not having income definitely is very climate friendly overall (less humans = less negative impact on climate after all) I really hope you can see yourself why this isn't actually a proper solution. Unless you want to see humanity go extinct but in that case might as well also continue the way we have so far.
Company decisions are made by employees. Definitely you should demand the option for sustainable travel.
But, yeah, it's an easy argument. Trains have WiFi, so you can work while you're moving without harming productivity
Corporations are notoriously democratic.
I can work just as well on a plane. I don't need WiFi, a company laptop (which I do have) is all I need. Any and all files can be saved beforehand for offline access and then I just upload them once I do have WiFi or LAN available.
Yeah, and worsen the climate catastrophe
Seriously if the company I work for insists on me taking a plane to somewhere that's 100% on them and not on me. Don't try to make people responsible for decisions they have exactly zero say in. That just makes the average person completely shy away from even trying to make it better in situations where they have the ability to because why bother when you're getting blamed anyways?
I had exactly one single plane trip in my entire life (going by life expectancy for my not-US country I'm about halfway through) that I wanted to do and that's easily compensated by me not having kids while living in a western country. I don't buy bottled water either and instead use exclusively water from my tap because it's safe to drink and doesn't need plastic bottles. I wear my clothes until they're impossible to repair and once they reach that point I cut them up and use them to clean if the fabric allows it. I negotiated for more wfh days than the higher ups like to see in exchange for a slightly lower raise to cut down commute. I'm still trying to get my landlord to install an electric charger for cars so I can swap my car to an electric one, I even offered to pay that charger myself because no car is sadly no option. Especially not when with the current temperatures the biggest train company actually starts to DISCOURAGE people from using trains because the risk of getting a heat stroke is too high thanks to the air conditioning not being able to handle the current heat wave. Heck I could keep going with the things I do but this wall of text is already long enough. And unlike you I don't shit on people who do not have a choice with things, because that's just not a cool move and actually hinders any and all improvement.
or better: proton meet conferences or jitsi conferences
I am guessing they paid for the wifi so they could use ChatGPT
I meant in terms of sustainability.
OP is so focused on AI that they didn't even get that. It's weird to be flying on a plane and concerned about the environmental impact of a single person using AI for (at least) a positive position.
Their is more irony in OPs own situation than there is in the person they were attempting to criticize.
I see why you’re concerned, but I had to travel across the country for a wedding. The travel was necessary. You are creating a false equivalency between my necessary travel schedule requiring my to fly only one time this year because of an obligation to a loved one, and the person’s entirely unnecessary, daily AI use that is a result of their own laziness. Hope this helps!
I would say that its mostly about the conference goer. We're so used to the absurd level of waste of a flight, that we are bothered by the comparatively tiny waste of an AI query. Just like we're bothered by avocados but not red meat.
plane heading towards sf, because sf mayor is quite specific person to feature. almost every tech conference if not 100% is all variation of different AI usage in SF.