Source (Bluesky)
this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2025
427 points (86.6% liked)
Fuck AI
3721 readers
1512 users here now
"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"
A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
paint is poison. I don't see people making anti-print posts. Not to diss on your antiAI zealotry ( i am your asshole, you see; i love antiAI.) I just would like to see more antiPrint posts, if the environment is your concern.
When it comes to intellectual property… are you mouthing the corporations that profit from it? Is intellectual property the solution to keep creative people alive in an exploitive economy?
Whataboutism is a really lazy argument.
it's not "whataboutism". An image maker, has to take it into consideration.
marginally few artists use natural materials. If pollution is the corcern, then there will be no movies, no touring groups, no streaming, no paintings, no prints, no this… no that.
You what about'd printing. It is textbook Whataboutism. Sorry to trigger you with textbooks.
:) thanks for "triggering me".
i ask for coherence. If you take it as whataboutism 🤷
Harmfulness of paint doesn't discredit environmental questions around certain uses of AI.
Textbook whataboutism.
AI is harmful to the environment, to which you responded, NO paint is harmful.
Now you are tripling down. Cut the crap.
The environment is more my area of interest, so I'm going to focus on that part.
Before I looked into AI's environmental impacts, I too had thought it might be overfocusing a bit on the wrong areas, but I didn't realize how much the order of magnitudes had changed. Before the large AI models we're seeing now, data centers weren't a major source of change in energy consumption. Overall power consumption in places like the US had been mostly level for the previous 10-20 years (up until 2020). But AI is not like most past datatcenter workloads, it is constantly high power usage. Especially for model training, it's using the equipment at full utilization for almost the entire time. It's using higher energy chips and far more chips overall. Besides training, typical datacenter workloads before high AI usage weren't super high energy per request, but that isn't true of AI either. The rapid increase in the energy consumption from it is what's driving the issue
It's causing us to delay closing of fossil fuel plants. It's making previous declining datacenter energy stop declining and go the opposite direction and projected to increase datacenter energy usage go up by 165% by 2030
https://www.goldmansachs.com/insights/articles/ai-to-drive-165-increase-in-data-center-power-demand-by-2030
If we were talking about water usage of AI and someone brought up agriculture's (especially animal agriculture) more dominant use, that would be fair to mention and talk about. But that doesn't excuse AI's water usage, just pose another area to also focus on
Sounds like a niche just waiting for you to fill it, my friend.
:)