Listen, as long as I can find fault in any attempt at making the world slightly less shitty, I can avoid having to take any responsibility for my part in all of this.

It’s not just profitable, it also requires most people in the west (probably 99% of people here) to realize there understanding of what a “basic level of quality of life” is is completely scewed by our immense privilege. Globally speaking, we are all part of the top 10% destroying the planet the most. From memory, a single american going vegan can make up for a families worth of emissions in a poorer country.

There’s no amount of rich people we can eat or corporations we can destroy that will allow us to just live like we are at the moment. Nowhere close.

It’s crazy how long that misrepresented study stays alive. The point wasn’t to find fault, it was to figure out how much comes from people in general. After all, nature does create it’s own green house gases.

By the logic of the study, the oil company that sold Swift her kerosene is 100% responsible for it. By that studies logic me, you and Swift are EQUALLY not responsible for ANY oil we use, ever. That’s obviously stupid.

The actual price is hard to really know, but I think training should also factor in. The hype of LLMs is based on the fantastical idea of continunous improvement forever, so you need to keep training. Even ignoring the hype part, you still need to retrain simply to update the data inside the LLM.

I guess we’ll only know for sure after the crash/readjustment.

From my memory of their financials, they actually get enough donations for the browser. The issue is the for profit companies fetish for a million different side quests.

There’s following the law, and then there’s giving away data to government agency just because they asked nicely, and could MAYBE get a warrant in the future. It is the equivalent of letting police into your house without a warrant, because maybe they’ll get one.

Can you point to the justifying? If your argument is “AI bad because water usage”, then you have to actually demonstrate it’s a problem, and that you’ve always cared about water usage.

In the post they very EXPLICITLY state that there are many real issues with AI, just that water is the worst of them.

Do you know how psy-op for a movement works? Simple, you start focussing the movement on obviously false or irrelevant topics. That way, nothing useful gets accomplished, and the movement looks like a joke to anyone with a brain.

Are you a secret pro AI agent?