Hacker News Reader

Comment by Arodex | Hacker News Reader

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.

View on HN

> 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.

> 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.

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.

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.

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.

I don't consider you reasonable if this is your best attempt at a strawman argument.

"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.

> 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

Reply on news.ycombinator.com