You simply don't like any criticism of AI, as shown by your false assertions that Pike works at Google (he left), or the fact Google and others were trying to make their data centers emit less CO2 - and that effort is completely abandoned directly because of AI.

And you can't assert that AI is "revolutionary" and "a vague threat" at the same time. If it is the former, it can't be the latter. If it is the latter, it can't be the former.

▲

tarsinge 11 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> that effort is completely abandoned directly because of AI

That effort is completely abandoned because of the current US administration and POTUS a situation that big tech largely contributed to. It’s not AI that is responsible for the 180 zeitgeist change on environmental issues.

▲

SecretDreams 9 hours ago | parent [-]

> It’s not AI that is responsible for the 180 zeitgeist change on environmental issues.

Yes, much like it's not the gun's fault when someone is killed by a gun. And, yet, it's pretty reasonable to want regulation around these tools that can be destructive in the wrong hands.

▲

tarsinge 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

This is off topic, I’m talking about the environmental footprint of data centers. In the 2010s I remember when responding to RFPs I had to specify the carbon footprint of our servers. ESG was all the rage and every big tech company was trying to appear green. Fast forward to today where companies, investors, and obviously the administration are more than fine with data centers burning all the oil/gas/coal power that can be found.

	▲	SecretDreams 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Is it off topic? What're the long term consequences of climate change? Do we even care anymore to your original point? Don't get me wrong, this field is doing damage on a couple of fronts - but climate change is certainly one of them.

▲

user34283 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I don't consider it reasonable to want regulation for tools that are as of now as potentially destructive as free access to Google search.

	▲	SecretDreams 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I don't consider you reasonable if this is your best attempt at a strawman argument.

▲

lukan 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

"You can't assert that AI is "revolutionary" and "a vague threat" at the same time""

Revolutions always came with vague (or concrete) threats as far as I know.

▲

jabedude 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> And you can't assert that AI is "revolutionary" and "a vague threat" at the same time.

I never asserted that AI is either of those things

▲

ywn 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

	▲	Arodex 11 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Why should I be concerned with something that doesn't exist, will certainly never exist, and even if I were generous and entertained that something that breaks every physical law of the universe starting with entropy could exist, would result in "it" torturing a copy of myself to try to influence me in the past? Nothing there makes sense at any level. But people getting fired and electricity bills skyrocketing (as well as RAM etc.) are there right now.
	▲	mrwrong 11 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		do you get scared when you hear other ghost stories too?