sc94597 said:
So in the example you provided, the area affected is in a state where the population has historically voted to have no to few environmental regulations, and already had issues with pollution before the data centers came in, since well, it industrialized. The majority (white) population has voted this way because they know these environmental harms will mostly affect working class, non-white Americans in segregated areas. But the production and harms have pre-dated AI by centuries, and the solution must encompass more than just addressing AI. It's a political and social problem.
In other jurisdictions, where environment regulations are far stricter typically these investments are (often required to be) coupled with carbon-neutral or carbon-negative initiatives (1,2.) And these competitors are out-competing Elon, because they have what his company doesn't have - high-quality talent where as he has indentured servants who work for him for their H1B visas. Since we were talking about an AI produced by Google that is helping both humans and animals, let's also note that they have been pushing for efficient compute for a while. For example, it was only a few days ago that they released a paper on how to reduce memory consumption of current systems by about 6 times, something they could have guarded and kept as a competitive edge. There is also the matter that "AI is making Renewable Energy smarter" as noted by the Reneweable Energy Institute.
Edit: Not sure why this post got screwed up in its formatting, but you can quote it to read it. |
I read it, but it still sounds absolutely stupid. AI is destroying the economy, destroying the ecology, causing wrongful arrests, and has been used in war crimes.
Non of you who are pro-AI will sway me towards this unnecessary and heartless technology that is destroying the world as we speak.
Anyone who says AI is good for anything at all is as blind as today's CEOs.
