711

submitted 2 weeks ago by ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone

56 comments fedilink hide all child comments

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

[+] ReCursing@lemmings.world -7 points 2 weeks ago

I think you mean:

yes (the environmental angle is a complete distraction and red herring from moving towards more sustainable energy production generally; the ethical one is just plain nonsense spread by people with absolutely no idea how these things work)

yes (people use and like them, people have fun with them and create great art with them. You might not but that’s a you problem)

and … well actually probably no tbh (but that’s a problem with capitalism not technology).

Stop making shit up to dismiss new technology because you’re a luddite

[-] Failx@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

In theory valid point and I approve but I'd disagree the sustainability factor. Even with renewables we won't have infinite energy, so we still need to think what we need to use the availabile energy for. The taining ist already ridiculously expensive and should the model become extremely popular it might still pull a lot of energy.

Needs to be evaluated on a per model usefulness / Energy Consumption basis.

And I doubt most current models would score very highly on that. (but please tell me those who do)

[-] ReCursing@lemmings.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

The amount of solar energy that hits the Earth every day is enough to power it for a year, and that's not including wind, wave, or anything else. (yes I know we can't gather it all but the amount of energy available is absolutely gigantic