@bekkaboo@girlcock.club Linux itself is heavily using AI models. Therefore, every Linux distribution moving to recent kernel versions is heavily built on top of using AI models. Creating a Linux distribution not heavily using it would require a hard fork of the Linux kernel and many other projects.
It's unclear what would be accomplished by banning AI for a tiny portion of the code while continuing to use Linux, AOSP, Chromium and hundreds of other projects heavily using it. We'd still be benefiting from it.
GrapheneOS is currently defending its use of AI coding tools on Mastodon against complaints by various accounts claiming to be users.
We do not understand where you’re coming from or why you’re so incredibly angry with us. It’s not justified and does not make sense.
I am sure I will be down voted on Lemmy for this but using AI for development by a team who is already experienced in development of the product they are working on is not a moral failing.
It also didn’t exist at all 5 years ago. Why are we as a society allowing new ecological damage? When will we stop? The billionaires want it to be never as long as it gives them money and power.
That’s an “I have no idea what I’m talking about” if I ever heard one.
“Citation needed” IS polite. You claim it’s not polluting, so clearly you know the CO2 emissions numbers from SpaceX’s datacenters that are being run off direct-connect to natural gas generators. So, how about it? How “not polluting” are they?
It’s a matter of framing. If you compare them to older datacenters they are atrocious because they’re bigger and consume more energy. But in the grand scheme of things all things IT pale in comparison to e.g. producing beef. Now with that framing you can’t sell AI hate though because people like beef, so it’s always just comparing large datacenters to smaller datacenters with the obvious results.
That’s an awful lot of typing instead of just saying “I’m a lying liar who doesn’t know what he’s talking about. That’s why I offer no actual data - because the actual numbers destroy my entire argument.”
Unfortunately, as you can see, you are in a crowd of liars. Now, I am certainly not accusing you personally of being dishonest, but it does tend to bias your audience against you. Sorry.
The numbers aren’t particularly bad. It’s not for nothing that the EU has classified natural gas as green energy.
Hey, I think ai can be a useful tool and I use both cloud hosted and local models.
The ecological impact is god awful.
Datacenters run on fossil fuel turbines to meet demand when there isn’t enough capacity on the grid or just 24/7 because the residents of the nearby municipality said they don’t want brownouts.
Fundamentally ai datacenters transform expensive to transmit electricity into cheap to transmit data, financializing what was previously a relatively insulated commodity whose pricing and production reflect local demand into a globally traded commodity whose pricing and production reflect global demand.
If you don’t have a background in the history of industry and environment: that’s bad news for the environment (and anyone who relies on stable power rates).
Production of ai computing components requires mining rare earth minerals and phenomenal amounts of power. This is the same process with nearly the same inputs as the production of general purpose computing parts (if you leave off the increased rare earths needed to mitigate electromigration in single digit nanometer processes!) but the increased demand has already brought more fabs up to meet it meaning more use of resources and energy in production before the first kilowatt of inference is run on those chips.
Turbine blades for datacenter generators are also limited by production and are currently years out for delivery. These are components produced by advanced aerospace manufacturing shops which use massive amounts of energy to shape alloys of metals that have to be yanked out of the ground and smelted into some esoteric type of steel or aluminum first.
So even without the water concerns datacenters have tremendous impact on the environment.
But the water concerns are legitimate. Swamp chillers divert flowing water into the air where it is blown anywhere but where it would have flowed. Which is fine if you aren’t downstream of one I guess.
All this is to say: if you don’t care about the impacts you can rationalize that however you like, but they exist.
Layoffs aren’t the problem here…the problem is that society requires people generate their own worth through work, and suddenly a good chunk of that work is now significantly less valuable.
Requiring less work is a good thing. Humans should be striving to minimize work. That’s what humanity is good at.
The problem comes in that while the “input” of AI is, essentially, the collection of all human knowledge…while the output is money for a small handful of people…people who themselves contributed next to nothing to that pile of human knowledge (and in fact are probably running a deficit to it).
That ain’t right. We are all shareholders in the collection of all human knowledge. We should all be getting dividends from its work.
It should be noted that the input of all human knowledge is getting the door closed and locked behind it. Requiring you to buy tokens to access said information.
And if you refuse to provide more training data to their services that collect said data, like reddit, facebook, x, then you can’t access essentially the entire internet. With google locking down captchas to only “verified” android phones. And every website requiring you to sign up with a ID card, and locking you out when you use a VPN.
So not only will your jobs will be taken away but your autonomy and access to what used to be free information. Or not even information sometimes your job or access to a services requires you to use these things. Even just getting into your apartment with a RFID reader on your apparments official app. You have to exist in their panopitcon just to even exist in many situations.
Oh and the best part the only thing worth money in the ai industry is all your user data and how it gets fed into palantirs networks. From every single comment you make on their services, and everytime you order a cheese burger in public, that all gets logged because you are a domestic terrorist for thinking maybe we should hold these people accountable.
Yes. Trump’s deranged acts are seriously harming the US economy but also doing a lot of damage to the global economy. Anyone who blames AI for layoffs is effectively helping Trump/the global right by covering up their incompetence and failure. To be fair, Putin’s war is also causing much harm.
As for the layoff blame, just because I say I like hamburgers doesn’t mean I hate hotdogs. Layoffs can be happening from both those things, and just because people are acknowledging one source doesn’t mean they are helping the other source…
I said “leftist” in quotes. Almost everyone here self-identifies as being on the left, at least insofar as they oppose Trump. And yet… well.
I am skeptical if AI is already having a substantial effect on employment. In any case, I don’t think these people care. You don’t see anyone arguing for a better social safety net/unemployment benefits. Here’s someone saying that people lose their jobs over AI, but you also have people saying AI is useless. They really don’t care.
I’m with Linus Torvalds and GrapheneOS on this. AI is a useful tool, for all its flaws and negative externalities.
https://deadsimpletech.com/blog/no-such-thing-as-just-a-tool
I am sure I will be down voted on Lemmy for this but using AI for development by a team who is already experienced in development of the product they are working on is not a moral failing.
Don’t forget the negative internalities (it makes it’s users dumber and the codebase less maintainable).
But yes it is useful, and the knee jerk hate comes mostly as a reaction to the marketing lies told by the companies selling it.
Luckily, the “negative externalities” are mostly made-up bullshit.
The ecological damage is not made up.
It’s pretty insignificant compared to the rest of the economy. Focusing on AI to the exclusion of bigger issues is actively harmful.
It also didn’t exist at all 5 years ago. Why are we as a society allowing new ecological damage? When will we stop? The billionaires want it to be never as long as it gives them money and power.
Renewable energy makes good progress, but as you can see here, many people have other priorities.
So AI data centers are being built powered with renewable energy, right?
Citation needed. You’re just straight-up lying or clueless as to what’s actually going on.
The water usage “issue” has been blown out of proportion when compared to something as unnecessary as the ethanol that gets put in gasoline
You have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about.
It’s not hard to look up. If you need help, ask for help politely.
That’s an “I have no idea what I’m talking about” if I ever heard one.
“Citation needed” IS polite. You claim it’s not polluting, so clearly you know the CO2 emissions numbers from SpaceX’s datacenters that are being run off direct-connect to natural gas generators. So, how about it? How “not polluting” are they?
It’s a matter of framing. If you compare them to older datacenters they are atrocious because they’re bigger and consume more energy. But in the grand scheme of things all things IT pale in comparison to e.g. producing beef. Now with that framing you can’t sell AI hate though because people like beef, so it’s always just comparing large datacenters to smaller datacenters with the obvious results.
That’s an awful lot of typing instead of just saying “I’m a lying liar who doesn’t know what he’s talking about. That’s why I offer no actual data - because the actual numbers destroy my entire argument.”
Unfortunately, as you can see, you are in a crowd of liars. Now, I am certainly not accusing you personally of being dishonest, but it does tend to bias your audience against you. Sorry.
The numbers aren’t particularly bad. It’s not for nothing that the EU has classified natural gas as green energy.
Hey, I think ai can be a useful tool and I use both cloud hosted and local models.
The ecological impact is god awful.
Datacenters run on fossil fuel turbines to meet demand when there isn’t enough capacity on the grid or just 24/7 because the residents of the nearby municipality said they don’t want brownouts.
Fundamentally ai datacenters transform expensive to transmit electricity into cheap to transmit data, financializing what was previously a relatively insulated commodity whose pricing and production reflect local demand into a globally traded commodity whose pricing and production reflect global demand.
If you don’t have a background in the history of industry and environment: that’s bad news for the environment (and anyone who relies on stable power rates).
Production of ai computing components requires mining rare earth minerals and phenomenal amounts of power. This is the same process with nearly the same inputs as the production of general purpose computing parts (if you leave off the increased rare earths needed to mitigate electromigration in single digit nanometer processes!) but the increased demand has already brought more fabs up to meet it meaning more use of resources and energy in production before the first kilowatt of inference is run on those chips.
Turbine blades for datacenter generators are also limited by production and are currently years out for delivery. These are components produced by advanced aerospace manufacturing shops which use massive amounts of energy to shape alloys of metals that have to be yanked out of the ground and smelted into some esoteric type of steel or aluminum first.
So even without the water concerns datacenters have tremendous impact on the environment.
But the water concerns are legitimate. Swamp chillers divert flowing water into the air where it is blown anywhere but where it would have flowed. Which is fine if you aren’t downstream of one I guess.
All this is to say: if you don’t care about the impacts you can rationalize that however you like, but they exist.
Layoffs are made-up?
Layoffs aren’t the problem here…the problem is that society requires people generate their own worth through work, and suddenly a good chunk of that work is now significantly less valuable.
Requiring less work is a good thing. Humans should be striving to minimize work. That’s what humanity is good at.
The problem comes in that while the “input” of AI is, essentially, the collection of all human knowledge…while the output is money for a small handful of people…people who themselves contributed next to nothing to that pile of human knowledge (and in fact are probably running a deficit to it).
That ain’t right. We are all shareholders in the collection of all human knowledge. We should all be getting dividends from its work.
It should be noted that the input of all human knowledge is getting the door closed and locked behind it. Requiring you to buy tokens to access said information.
And if you refuse to provide more training data to their services that collect said data, like reddit, facebook, x, then you can’t access essentially the entire internet. With google locking down captchas to only “verified” android phones. And every website requiring you to sign up with a ID card, and locking you out when you use a VPN.
So not only will your jobs will be taken away but your autonomy and access to what used to be free information. Or not even information sometimes your job or access to a services requires you to use these things. Even just getting into your apartment with a RFID reader on your apparments official app. You have to exist in their panopitcon just to even exist in many situations.
Oh and the best part the only thing worth money in the ai industry is all your user data and how it gets fed into palantirs networks. From every single comment you make on their services, and everytime you order a cheese burger in public, that all gets logged because you are a domestic terrorist for thinking maybe we should hold these people accountable.
reduction in labour requirements are good.
Oh look! Another “leftist” trying to shift blame away from tariff man.
I’m not American if that is what you’re implying. Have a nice day.
Maybe I am just not understanding your direction based politics, but isn’t it the right that put him in office? Isn’t your comment backwards?
To be clear, I literally don’t know, it’s hard enough following my own country’s politics lol
Yes. Trump’s deranged acts are seriously harming the US economy but also doing a lot of damage to the global economy. Anyone who blames AI for layoffs is effectively helping Trump/the global right by covering up their incompetence and failure. To be fair, Putin’s war is also causing much harm.
Then why did you say they were leftist?
As for the layoff blame, just because I say I like hamburgers doesn’t mean I hate hotdogs. Layoffs can be happening from both those things, and just because people are acknowledging one source doesn’t mean they are helping the other source…
I said “leftist” in quotes. Almost everyone here self-identifies as being on the left, at least insofar as they oppose Trump. And yet… well.
I am skeptical if AI is already having a substantial effect on employment. In any case, I don’t think these people care. You don’t see anyone arguing for a better social safety net/unemployment benefits. Here’s someone saying that people lose their jobs over AI, but you also have people saying AI is useless. They really don’t care.
Reality altering disinformation as fact, using a machine that is essentially plagiarism incarnate? You are pushing a false narrative OP