all 4 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 11 points 3 months ago

“Authorized”

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago

    we are so fucked

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago

    I have my doubts they will be able to operate this at required temperature. It's hard to even keep a single room cool with 24000btu window unit and no AI in it . They should put all these things in Canada near the hydroelectric on the pnw coast where the temps are always cool and electricity is cheap and waste heat is useful for the green house industry

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago

    "If only we power Ai enough, it can save us from climate change."

    Superinteligent Ai: You should stop emitting so much CO².

    "Wow, amazing. Turns out Ai is a woke environmentalist "

  • source
  • 48 comments in c/fuck_ai@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 113 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    It's fine guys, I switched to paper straws.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 48 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    These fucking assholes.

    "Its fine everyone. Don't worry about the terrifying changes in climate, or the habitability of the planet... we're making billions over here."

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 35 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    "Authorized" is one of the most evil parts.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 30 points 3 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 25 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    This is more than the annual carbon output of all private jets in 2023 (19.8 m tons)

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 15 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Amazon's AI is hands down the worst fucking one.

    You can't go to their website, or their app, without having it shoved down your throat. It's always annoying and intrusive and it gets in the way of searching for goods.

    And it's doing this now? Fucking insane. This is ALL insane.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 3 months ago

    I don't think it is so much about what ai is running on it.

    The compute demand can be rented out to other companies like how Anthropic (Claude) pays for compute at SpaceX's colossus in Memphis Tennessee.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 3 months ago

    Makes me wonder what the punishment should be if any of that CO2 crosses the border.

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    Time to build some siege engines.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] 6 points 3 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 13 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    How good are the intake air screens on these? Good enough to stop drone dropped sandblasting media?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 13 points 3 months ago

    They could have gone for solar, but no, ride or die fossil fuels on all of these projects.

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    This is is ridiculous. There is no way 7GW in a single facility is going to happen any time soon. First off, the gensets don't exist. There's a 3-year waiting list right now for gas turbines.

    The largest gas power plant is 8.5GW in the UAE and it took 40 years to build.

    There's no way this is going to happen. It's going to get delayed indefinitely

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (3 children)

    What's that power plant? Natural gas?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 3 months ago

    Slightly better than switching to paper straws is not buying from Amazon. I know it doesn't make a real difference because they'll never lose enough customers to notice, but at least YOU aren't supporting them. Also, yes, I know that AWS is a bigger part of the business, and literally unavoidable on the internet. I did say "slightly".

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    What ended all human life... was it a lack of food? Nope. Was it war? Shockingly, no. Twas global warming. Despite decades of warning, the humans marched forward to their own extinction. Year over year, found more efficient ways to accelerate their demise. Many even cheered it on! Their greatest invention was "AI". A largely useless bit of tech that ruined ecosystems and pushed the planet to a point it couldn't support humans.

    Was it preventable? Could the humans have survived? Yes. But it wasn't profitable to do that. They believed it better to go extinct rich than live not rich.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

    I disagree with your comment slightly, yes we are being irrational as a species. But I'm afraid statements like "they believed it was better to go extinct rich" will only feed misanthropy and apathy.

    In truth the minority of those in power do not act to stop the environmental crisis because they simply don't believe they will be affected by it. They have AC, work out of the sun, do not suffer any shortage, and can move out of any affected area. In their eyes only the masses will suffer, and for a while they will be right.

    Humanity is headed towards hell, not because of greed or stupidity, but because its elite largely does not live in the world it rules.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Our boring dystopia continues apace

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago

    Queue the Homer talking to Bart meme: largest source of pollution so far

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago

    The scale of that fucking madness

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago

    Turbines aren't boiler machines (with steam). Therefore they're less efficient as they can't take advantage of waste heat. Already more CO2 per WH.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago* (1 child)

    I'm sure the nitrogen dioxide emissions will be pretty high too.

    I wonder if the general populace enjoys having the AI companies prepare nitric acid in their lungs.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago

    It's worth the earth dying so I can get my useless crap in a hurry. /s

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago

    How much CO2 is produced, when such center burns week one, I wonder...Would it be worth it, to save from worse faith?

  • source
  • [+] 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago* (1 child)

    I like my treats. I'd rather not have to wprty about police kidnaping my childhood best friend who wasn't born here, or whether I'll have water in ten years.

    That's worth more than my treats. And being able to talk to everyone like they're people and have them treat me the same? Damn. Can I buy that with a kidney?

    And we can probably make better treats together if we take a minute to refactor shit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    I really wouldn't give two shits about all that CO₂ if it wasn't for the fact that air pollution knows no borders.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • 13 comments in c/progressivepolitics@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 13 points 3 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    I stopped using Amazon like 5 years ago, I get annoyed when eBay purchases show up in Amazon packaging because they use Amazon logistics

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    I stopped using it 20 years ago, but the point is that this kind of shit still affects all of us, customers or not. These fuckers are intent on burning down our planet just so billionaires can add some extra billions to their pile of money, and a handful of myopic techbros can go "Well akshually it is a very useful tool if you know how to use it".

    Fuck them all and their selfish murderous ways.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    "We're committed to 2040 net-zero goals."

    "But how do you plan on getting there?"

    "We're committed to it."

    Btw, net-zero is just a greenwashing term. Allowing emissions while balancing them on some spreadsheet in some obscure way is not the same as reducing emissions. It allows more pollution while pretending something is being done about it. Hey, like good old recycling.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago* (2 children)

    That is only partially true. With a working CO2 emission trading scheme this "balancing" means massive amounts of cross financing towards beneficial projects, eg for renewable ebergy projects etc. It adds a financial benefit to saving emissions and that is the only language markets seem to understand. It is by no means perfect but it is not just greeneashing and nothing else.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    It does depend on what if being done, and if that is effective at all (which are different topics). I agree that using it as incentive is what the market responds to best, but the problem is when the company is using the term themselves rather than as an encouragement for others. That is where it becomes PR rather than any actual drive for change.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago

    The company remains committed to 2040… er… no- 2050, no- 2060 goals

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Who the fuck authorized this?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago

    This is Texas. Ammo is cheap. A bullet hole through the later stages of the compressor or combustion sections of a turbine engine will make an expensive mess.

  • source