-108

submitted 2 months ago by anus@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

34 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Dekkia@this.doesnotcut.it 12 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I struggle to see why numerous scientists (and even Sam 'AI' Altman himself) would be wrong about this but a random substack post holds the truth.

[-] Takapapatapaka@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

Having read the entire post, i think there's a misunderstanding :

this post is about ChatGPT and LLM chatbots in general, not AI as a whole.
This post claims to be 100% aligned with scientists and that AI as a whole is bad for the environment.
What they claim is that chatbots are only 1-3% of AI use and yet benefit to 400 million people (rest is mostly business stuff and serves more entreprises or very specific needs), therefore they do not consume much by themselves (just like we could keep 1-3% of cars going and be just fine with environment)

this post was submitted on 01 May 2025

-108 points (13.0% liked)

Technology

72585 readers

1917 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related news or articles.
Be excellent to each other!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS