As someone who actually gives a shit about the environment and global warming and has been putting this into practice for more than a decade through daily personal sacrifices: no, I downvote it because if you properly look into it, AI is just completely insignificant compared to cars, air travel, clothing, food, needless junk and so on that it's a joke. It's always brought up by people who never cared, but now pretend to do so because they hate LLMs for other reasons. The irony is that some of those are actually _good_ reasons but they're too cowardly to admit them. There's nothing unmanly about admitting you're afraid of AI taking your job, becoming more intelligent, and ending up in a dystopia.

Go run the numbers and compare them vs. what it takes to produce a single hamburger or hoodie. Anyone who actually cares has already done this and drawn this conclusion.

While one can raise environmental concerns about the AI datacenter buildout, I don't think it is fair to say that it "ruins the planet".

I don't think it is a good contribution to the discussion around Simon's LLM use to fix a CSS bug.

That's an interesting choice as a source. It doesn't mention climate change or human impacts at all and describes El Niño as a naturally occurring event.

> The El Nino is a phenomenon that occurs naturally

It was posted at 5am in New York... not sure that that was a US view, so the fact that the platform is US-owned doesn't seem so relevant, if there's a global audience.

That being said, I do agree it is a legit thought (and moreso, completely on point in the subthread discussing downsides), and that it shouldn't be downvoted.