What about finding a more practical use for the water after it's been run through the cooling system? It could be run through a treatment facility and made drinkable.

There could certainly be applications for the water, but I don't exactly have a ton of ideas myself. It could be raised high up where it can't cause harm to cool down, but that would take energy. I guess some of the energy could be reclaimed by using the water for hydroelectric power once it's cooled down, but I'm going to guess it's just not worth it.

I'm also going to guess that your idea takes a lot of energy.

It's not like the AI slobs can't afford to implement such ideas. They've made billions by not paying taxes and not adequately paying their lower level employees.

I'm not sure I fully agree about that, but regardless: Energy and equipment don't come out of nowhere. Yes, you pay for them with money, but they need to be produced too, and that production has some environmental cost as well. It might not be a net win to handle all that water better if you consider the production chain as well (or it might be - I don't know).

I can't come up with anything better. Normally I would say we blow up AI data centers, but apparently blowing up buildings belonging to rich scumbags is terrorism.

We're running out of legal ways to fight back against AI. -_-

You could always start a political movement or perhaps find an existing one, if there is one. I think that's kind of the go-to solution for a lot of things, but I'm sure it requires a lot of dedication and time as well. As a somewhat more lightweight alternative, you could try to raise awareness and influence people online, but it can go only so far. Either way, you probably need to properly group up with people to really make an impact - and if you can't find enough people to support your cause, you're not likely to make much impact, but it's a big thing, so I think that's only natural. It's still a legal way and the primary way in democratic countries, and one that might still be underexplored.

If it weren't for my social anxiety or the cost of gas I'd be able to do in person meetups to stand against AI. The best I've been able to do is make anti-AI social media posts with anti-AI hashtags.

...I guess that complicates things a bit, or maybe even more than just a bit. Anyway, for online interaction (social media etc.), I think there's two approaches:

• What you've been doing. I fear it might result in a bit of an echo chamber thing, where people who already agree with you will support you. You might be able to convince people on the fence, but it's probably harder to convince anyone not already leaning your way. I don't think this is an approach without its merits, but it's good to realize that it has its limits too.
• Try to find common ground, then discuss about the disagreements and see if that might result in the other party changing their mind. It's probably more time-consuming and possibly thankless, because you won't be able to convince many to join your cause - but you might get the occasional victory every now and then, depending on the quality of your arguments. My reasoning for this approach is that the other party is probably more open to your argument if you show understanding for their position instead of starting out with a conflict approach.

Or you could do both: pick one based on the situation. And actually the same probably goes in the real world as well and not just online.

I don't know if this is any help, but it's food for thought.

I'd like AI companies to find common ground with the rest of us, but they're too greedy and ignorant to listen.

Personally I think the way things are going is a result of how our society is organized in general, capitalism/free market in particular. Companies have little to no incentive to behave differently from how they're behaving now. Some key points of mine about what could or ideally should be changed:

• Set up proper rules for gathering training data and enforce them - even retroactively. This is my main issue with AI: in many situations, training data has been gathered in dubious ways, possibly violating copyright. Realistically this is probably not ever getting fixed, at least retroactively, unless some major societal changes come to be (e.g. revolutions).
• Environmental impact should be controlled with environmental legislation. I don't think AI needs any special rules - laws should be good enough to cover data centers without being targeted at AI specifically.
• Welfare of people should be ensured even when jobs are made redundant by AI.
  • As a somewhat related point, culture (mostly different kinds of art, I'm guessing?) should be supported more strongly if it's weakened too much by increase AI usage.