You don’t find it weird that CNN frames it in an argument about greenhouse gas?
To me it’s such an obvious appeal to certain groups. We’re way past caring about wasting resources. We get rid of AI right now where are we left with? Nothing, nothing changes as far as wasting resources go. We don’t fix anything removing it.
AI is practical and probably one of the most interesting developments with the potential to be a pretty big leveler if developed correctly.
But I think the problem is that because it can level playing field it’s harmful to people who want to horde their power. So they have to use media to generate a lot of hate and angry towards it so we all reject it. Look at every AI headlines and replace AI with “immigrants” or “LGQTB” it’s practically cut and paste. It’s harassing women and children. It’s taking our jobs. They’re a waste of resources. They threaten your way of life.
I don’t find it weird, no, because it’s backed with factual bits of information, and it’s true that, despite being interesting as far as the science goes, the tech failed to find its place (much like crypto whose only legit use case is crime).
You say a 58% decrease in energy consumption at Google is nothing, I’d say this is already a huge chunk of Google’s emissions that would be gone, which at that scale isn’t insignificant. And Google is not the only tech titan in the world.
If you don’t care about GHG emissions, some (a lot) of us do. And we’ll keep holding criminals accountable for their actions. Be it in Big Oil or in Big Tech.
Another thing: when talking about climate change, nobody blames immigrants because blaming immigrants for things is something rightoids do and they don’t care much about climate.
On the other hand, guess where migrants will come once their place of origin ends up under the ocean, or when it becomes so hot you can no longer live there? And guess who’s going to be the most affected by the massive influx of climate migrants?
You don’t find it weird that CNN frames it in an argument about greenhouse gas?
To me it’s such an obvious appeal to certain groups. We’re way past caring about wasting resources. We get rid of AI right now where are we left with? Nothing, nothing changes as far as wasting resources go. We don’t fix anything removing it.
AI is practical and probably one of the most interesting developments with the potential to be a pretty big leveler if developed correctly.
But I think the problem is that because it can level playing field it’s harmful to people who want to horde their power. So they have to use media to generate a lot of hate and angry towards it so we all reject it. Look at every AI headlines and replace AI with “immigrants” or “LGQTB” it’s practically cut and paste. It’s harassing women and children. It’s taking our jobs. They’re a waste of resources. They threaten your way of life.
I don’t find it weird, no, because it’s backed with factual bits of information, and it’s true that, despite being interesting as far as the science goes, the tech failed to find its place (much like crypto whose only legit use case is crime).
You say a 58% decrease in energy consumption at Google is nothing, I’d say this is already a huge chunk of Google’s emissions that would be gone, which at that scale isn’t insignificant. And Google is not the only tech titan in the world.
If you don’t care about GHG emissions, some (a lot) of us do. And we’ll keep holding criminals accountable for their actions. Be it in Big Oil or in Big Tech.
Another thing: when talking about climate change, nobody blames immigrants because blaming immigrants for things is something rightoids do and they don’t care much about climate.
On the other hand, guess where migrants will come once their place of origin ends up under the ocean, or when it becomes so hot you can no longer live there? And guess who’s going to be the most affected by the massive influx of climate migrants?