Re:AI, but at What Cost? Breakdown of AI's Carbon Footprint
by OKRainbowKid on Tuesday January 28, 2025 @09:34AM
(#42852748)
I don't see how discussions about how to better distribute limited resources go against "human flourishing". The opposite, actually.
Re:AI, but at What Cost? Breakdown of AI's Carbon Footprint
by pieix on Tuesday January 28, 2025 @09:38AM
(#42852798)
The solution is to grow our way out of it — make more energy, make cleaner energy, develop new technologies — rather than browbeat people into submission with moral arguments because you don't like how they've chosen to deploy their resources.
I am apt to agree but I reject this whole argument completely. This is just part of a de-growth agenda where every action is looked at through the lens of scarcity. Sometimes its environment, other times its equity, but it always leads to extinguishing human flourishing.
Examples:
- Having babies is bad because it increases the carbon footprint
- Having babies is bad because world is over-populated
- Giving advantages to your children is bad because other's aren't as advantaged
- Why invest in rockets when people are starving in [country]
- Honors classes are bad because the distribution of the participants is not proportional to the population
It's all just so exhausting and at this point I refuse to engage with it at any level. There is no winning.