> these are unfair comparisons. it's not just a single laptop running all day it's all the graphic designer laptops that get replaced. it's not a single container of painting supplies it's all off them, (which are toxic by the way).

Please see my other comment about energy consumption and connect the dots with how open loop DLC systems are harmful to fresh water supplies (which is another comment of mine).

> so if power were plentiful and environmental you'd be onboard with it?

This is a pretty loaded way to ask this. Let me put this straight. I'm not against AI. I'm against how this thing is built. Namely:

    - Use of copyrighted and copylefted materials to train models and hiding under "fair use" to exploit people.
      - Moreover, belittling of people who create things with their blood sweat and tears and poorly imitating their art just for kicks or quick bucks.
    - Playing fast and loose with environment and energy consumption without trying to make things efficiently and sustainably to reduce initial costs and time to market.
    - Gaslighting the users and general community about how these things are built, and how it's a theater, again to make people use this and offload their thinking, atrophying their skills and making them dependent on these.

I work in HPC. I support AI workloads and projects, but the projects we tackle have real benefits, like ecosystem monitoring, long term climate science, water level warning and prediction systems, etc. which have real tangible benefits for the future of the humanity. Moreover, there are other projects trying to minimize environmental impact of computation which we're part of.

So it's pretty nuanced, and the AI iceberg goes well below OpenAI/Anthropic/Mistral trio.