this post was submitted on 29 Apr 2026
-77 points (10.3% liked)
Technology
84274 readers
3253 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.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Distracting hypothetical - ie a red herring. The question is not is it conceivable to build AI in a way that isn't inherently environmentally destructive. It isn't being done. Not at scale, nor is there any plans to do so. There's no intention to reduce reliance on fossil fuels powering datacenters. There isn't even a suggestion of intention to give lip-service to the problem so fantasizing about it serves no purpose.
These are not mutually exclusive. The golden parachute problem still exists.
That it is worthless doesn't make it not psychologically destructive. People want things that destroy their lives all the time. Drugs, gambling, AI sex bots, etc. We've known for a very long time there's ways to hijack people's behaviour and make them behave in ways that violate their values and good sense. The fact that AI slop directly engages in hacking our brains, and filling our heads with junk data and hallucinations is not internally inconsistent.
There is here in Australia
https://reneweconomy.com.au/byo-renewables-new-national-principles-set-bar-for-data-centre-energy-and-water-use/
There is in Europe:
https://www.iea.org/reports/energy-and-ai/energy-supply-for-ai
It's simple economics, renewables are the cheapest form of electricity so they want it, America != the world
But how does being fed useful information, coding for us, providing interesting stories, a caring AI boyfriend or girlfriend lead us to enslavement? This is like suggesting we're slaves to McDonalds, it's feels less like slavery and more like hyperbole, especially with the existence of open source models...
Speaking of open source models, happy release day of mistral medium!
https://huggingface.co/mistralai/Mistral-Medium-3.5-128B
It's from Mistral a french company!
https://mistral.ai/news/our-contribution-to-a-global-environmental-standard-for-ai
Maybe there is a suggestion ?
Misdirection. You're comparing the equivalent of small local retailers with a multinational mega-corps the scale of Amazon. Such projects are a rounding error in the wider market.
The "Usefulness" of this information is questionable at best, and wildly incorrect all too often. "Coding for us" is a double edged sword in that it makes an appealing shortcut, while also leaving us at extreme risk when it makes what is all too often a critical mistake we don't understand, a problem which will only get worse as we gradually forget how to code for ourselves. Also, it's not a "Caring AI Boyfriend" its a simulacrum of human interaction that does not care about anyone or anything. It's a Lovecraftian horror dressed up as a relationship. A perversion that treats humanity as a disease to be treated into remission.