Spyke

Climate. We don't need AI, we need people with decent jobs and fair wages. Plant trees, create preserved areas and lets stop destroying our collective home.

1
lemmy.world

Clear answer for me - everything else wins over pointless "AI"

90
ZDLreply
lazysoci.al

Making collages out of human excrement wins over pointless "AI" for me.

16
ZDLreply
lazysoci.al

Anything that makes rich people look stupid and blow money is good, yes.

11
ZDLreply
lazysoci.al

...

...

...

Shit. You got me with that.

But I'm more pro-OceanGate.

6
sopuli.xyz

Yeah, but what if people suddenly started spending money on it? Would you prefer investment bankers threw billions into that sinkhole or AI?

-1
athatetreply
lemmy.zip

Yeah, but what if people suddenly started spending money on fucking Jurassic Park? What about ai then, huh?

5

Can't say I'm excited about any of these options. I think we need a movie about hyperloop failing catastrophically to make the comparison easier. There already are lots of movies about AI taking over the world and a handful of movies where dinosaur experiments go horribly wrong. Haven't seen anything about a hyperloop disasters.

Would be cool though. Imagine a hyperloop getting stuck under the pacific ocean. If you open the door, the vacuum will kill you. If you somehow manage that, you're still under a bezillion tonnes of water, so good luck with that. If you still somehow survive, and make it to the surface, you're still bezillion km away from shore. The protagonist of that movie is going to need some ridiculous amounts of plot armor, or we're going to roll the credits after 15 minutes.

1

Hey I love the money hole. My father worked two jobs so he'd have money to dump in the money hole!

2

Well, thought more of the better stuff like nature, not Musk's brainfarts

2

What I find interesting is that a lot of these changes which are attributed to the purportedly "inevitable" changes associated with AI (or partly with its not-adoption), are real consequences of climate change.

  • loss of employment? Check.
  • profound change to living conditions? Check.
  • loss of labour productivity - including knowledge work? Check.
  • threathening the stability of the world-wide financial system? Check.
  • increasing likelihood of war? Check.
  • threathening even the continuity of human civilization? Check.
  • threathening the capability to compete on national scales if the change is not reponded to swiftly by governments? Check.
  • Correlated with obscene amounts of wealth concentration, impoverishing the huge majority of people, and disintegrating societies? Check.

It's as if AI is used as a distraction. Like the "accusation in a mirror" pattern.

11

How else do you think they will get a one world government? Cause the problems, depopulate the “undesirables”, cause conflict, and offer a solution to fix what you have created. Not a hard concept. The only way people will accept a totalitarian techno-fascist one world government is with an overwhelming catastrophe.

1
lemmy.ca

Not true at all. AI can and should be running on renewables alone.

17

Hmmmmm lower electric bills for our countries electorate OR giant buildings they hate that pollute their water, give them ill health from noise pollution, and take their jobs?

31

I mean, we must choose. Just not in favor of slopcenters burning through resources for highly dubious advantages.

27

Yeah we can have a global climate disaster without AI too dudes. We have options [jazz hands emoji dot png]

5

I mean that's an easy choice, but also no fucking way. Rich pricks would pay for data centers even if they had to run them exclusively off renewables. This is a bluff.

13
piefed.social

I want newer, cleaner, superior technology made with the help of AI to lessen, stop or even reverse Climate Change.

Also my Room is to damn hot! XD

5
reddthat.com

How is a token predictor that can only regurgitate old ideas going to invent something new?

0

I asked ai to refute this argument, but if you say these false things today, more than 4 year after the chatgpt moment then im probably wasting our time anyway.

1
ani.social

No we don't. I'm pretty sure we'll be able to miss all the climate goals even if we ban data centres.

6
Rothereply
piefed.social

Most probably. But not by such a high margin. The energy consumption of datacenters is completely insane.

10

Its not completely Insane for Datacenters or Supercomputers in Europa. Also our Supercomputers are always first in Green500, unlike USAs!

3

I just wish we could convince tptb into building that much grid capacity in renewables. For the citizenry. Not for buisness.

I mean I'm aware of a few projects, but like nothing on datacenter scale

1
feddit.it

I've started playing around with ollama on my PC. The models I've tried so far are hardly comparable to Claude but also aren't completely useless. If performance keeps improving, and hardware does as well, why rush it? We could accomplish similar results while spending a fractions of what others are spending.

2
Damagereply
feddit.it

Hey, so, I have great news for you about washing dishes...

2

Brain drain and Jobs. China and USA are already releasing less open models and now with fable5 ban for forwign nationals including green card workers a new escalation tier is reached.

3