You’re fighting a losing battle here, some people just have decided that AI is bad no matter what. There are quite many here on lemmy, which is a shame because there are good and bad sides about AI, but IMO it for sure is here to stay, so discussions would be interesting, again IMO.
You’re one of the persons I describe, a shame there is no discussion, because you have “made up your mind”. I mean I don’t have all the information about it all, so I’d like to know more, and I sincerely doubt that there is absolutely no good side of “AI”, lots of people disagree with that statement.
I mean 6 months ago people said exactly the same thing as you do today, but without the medical & research. Seems they were wrong.
Cars are necessary for a variety of applications, some life-saving. (Though it’d be less necessary with functional infrastructure / public transit.) AI slop is not necessary for literally anything. I think your brain is already atrophying, so I’m definitely looking to block my mind from whatever you’ve got going wrong in yours.
AI is bad, but it’s bizarre to point to its energy usage, out of all things. It’s really missing the forest for the trees. As top commenter’s data shows, even gaming on a gaming PC is so much worse (considering a 650W PSU, which is 6.5 times the TV example).
Yep, I’ve not had a productive discussion about it that I remember. It’s not just that people have made their minds up; they also will not hear anything that is misaligned with their belief, even if ultimately compatible: you don’t need to think that ai is useful or good to realise its energy use is not especially important. But if it’s bad everything about it must be bad.
You’re fighting a losing battle here, some people just have decided that AI is bad no matter what. There are quite many here on lemmy, which is a shame because there are good and bad sides about AI, but IMO it for sure is here to stay, so discussions would be interesting, again IMO.
Correct, because outside of scientific and medical applications (run by actual scientists and medical professionals), all AI is bad no matter what.
Nothing it can possibly do for you justifies the harm it does, and your reliance on it atrophies your cognitive skills.
Yeah, I wouldn’t say that.
Turns out doctors are just as susceptible to deskilling as anybody else who uses AI.
Fair, I was thinking more bruteforce-type applications like protein folding or synthesis pathways for certain medicines.
You’re one of the persons I describe, a shame there is no discussion, because you have “made up your mind”. I mean I don’t have all the information about it all, so I’d like to know more, and I sincerely doubt that there is absolutely no good side of “AI”, lots of people disagree with that statement.
I mean 6 months ago people said exactly the same thing as you do today, but without the medical & research. Seems they were wrong.
AI cannot possibly be a net good given the inherent pollution it causes. End of statement.
Like cars then?
You are just blocking your mind IMO.
Cars are necessary for a variety of applications, some life-saving. (Though it’d be less necessary with functional infrastructure / public transit.) AI slop is not necessary for literally anything. I think your brain is already atrophying, so I’m definitely looking to block my mind from whatever you’ve got going wrong in yours.
You seem to hate not only Artificial Intelligence but also General Intelligence.
So yeah go bother someone else.
Oooh I just saw you’re from dbzer0, explains a lot lol
Yeah, make up an excuse instead of thinking, smart move.
What are you going to do next, insults?
Blocked, I told you to stop wasting my time.
AI is bad, but it’s bizarre to point to its energy usage, out of all things. It’s really missing the forest for the trees. As top commenter’s data shows, even gaming on a gaming PC is so much worse (considering a 650W PSU, which is 6.5 times the TV example).
Yep, I’ve not had a productive discussion about it that I remember. It’s not just that people have made their minds up; they also will not hear anything that is misaligned with their belief, even if ultimately compatible: you don’t need to think that ai is useful or good to realise its energy use is not especially important. But if it’s bad everything about it must be bad.
If a single stream of water is polluted or a single living being is harmed for the benefit of producing AI slop, then yes, everything about it is bad.
“Net effect” is a concept for a reason.
Why? Do you apply the same reasoning to watching TV?
TV didn’t spike energy demand to the point where fossil fuel consumption increased within my lifetime, so that’s like 25% of a point at best.