▲ 1774 ▼ DuckDuckGo poll says 90% responders don't want AI (www.pcworld.com) submitted 9 months ago by very_well_lost@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world 234 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] Mwa@thelemmy.club 41 points 9 months ago (4 children) someone tell them AI isnt good for the environment permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] NewDay@piefed.social 5 points 9 months ago (2 children) Ecosia produces its own green solar energy. According to them, they produce twice as much as they consume. The AI is still shit, because it is just ChatGPT. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] morto@piefed.social 5 points 9 months ago Reducing the albedo of some area just to disperse the captured energy for no utility (ai) is still harmful to the environment and contributes to earth's energy imbalance. Solar energy is great when it replaces fossil fuel emissions, not when it's just wasted. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Mwa@thelemmy.club 2 points 9 months ago* hot take: this comment gives me a idea for them a opt-in AI powered entirely by solar energy if we solve the ethics problem first ofc. permalink fedilink source parent [–] kevin2107@lemmy.world 1 point 9 months ago I don't get this argument when literally everything else is hundreds of times worse like lifestock and cars. Removing either one today would dramatically change the environment. Do you drive a car or take any kind of transportation? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] NewDay@piefed.social 5 points 9 months ago (2 children) Ecosia produces its own green solar energy. According to them, they produce twice as much as they consume. The AI is still shit, because it is just ChatGPT. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] morto@piefed.social 5 points 9 months ago Reducing the albedo of some area just to disperse the captured energy for no utility (ai) is still harmful to the environment and contributes to earth's energy imbalance. Solar energy is great when it replaces fossil fuel emissions, not when it's just wasted. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Mwa@thelemmy.club 2 points 9 months ago* hot take: this comment gives me a idea for them a opt-in AI powered entirely by solar energy if we solve the ethics problem first ofc. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] morto@piefed.social 5 points 9 months ago Reducing the albedo of some area just to disperse the captured energy for no utility (ai) is still harmful to the environment and contributes to earth's energy imbalance. Solar energy is great when it replaces fossil fuel emissions, not when it's just wasted. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Mwa@thelemmy.club 2 points 9 months ago* hot take: this comment gives me a idea for them a opt-in AI powered entirely by solar energy if we solve the ethics problem first ofc. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] kevin2107@lemmy.world 1 point 9 months ago I don't get this argument when literally everything else is hundreds of times worse like lifestock and cars. Removing either one today would dramatically change the environment. Do you drive a car or take any kind of transportation? permalink fedilink source parent