this post was submitted on 03 May 2026
65 points (95.8% liked)
Technology
42871 readers
315 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
So, we're starting with this:
...and a complete assumption about the author's opinions. One that is in direct contradiction to what they've said in the article. I shouldn't need to elaborate on why this is a bad start.
Then you discount IP theft as a concept, when caring for creator's works (and encouraging more) is what IP was invented for. And yeah, it's grown massively out of control. There's a reason Cory Doctorow and many others have suggested that concern for copyright is the wrong reason to hate AI. But if you ask me, you still can hate AI for that when it comes to small creators, who cannot meaningfully weaponize the broken aspects of it. And those creators are precisely who AI companies disproportionately steal from.
Lastly, you end your comment the same way you started it, only now it's even more like the meme. The entire post is about how they quit their job because they now felt staying was unsound from both ethical and practical perspectives. That is a direct example of them following their morals.
I believe the arguments you make here are bad, but the condescension dripping off your post – especially when you're attacking the author for hypocrisies that aren't even real – is much worse. That's Reddit behavior, and it's not helping anyone.
Nah, these data centers are not even worth talking about being bad for the environment compared to almost everything else we do. Trying to use that as a primary focus here is just people looking for an excuse to hate the technology.
https://bryantresearch.co.uk/insight-items/comparing-water-footprint-ai/
Here's a beautiful article comparing the AI industry to Cattle farming. AI data center water use is measured in tens Billions of liters, while the beef industry is measured in Quadrillions.
You already shot down your own IP argument, I don't need to help you there. AI companies don't disproportionately steal from small creators, They may have done more of that in the first few iterations, but the datasets simply don't do that anymore. There's no need, they can train it on clean data, then just pull live from the web for specifics now.
I am dripping condescension because it's fucking stupid. There are plenty of horrible things happening in the world today, AI datacenters are so far down the list that they do not deserve the amount of effort people are putting in to hate them while far more significant things go un-recognized. The reason for this? Because people are being misled, and instead of figuring out things themselves they take the shit they read at face value.
I'm going assume your link is coming to a good conclusion. I find the idea that cattle farming produces a lot of greenhouse gases to be very believable, and so I will take that as a given. But even with that in mind, the argument doesn't hold.
First, people can be mad about two things at once. We don't have to pick between being upset about one contributor of climate change versus another, we can just be upset at both. Besides, I think it's safe to say that cattle farming is a better use of resources than AI is. Like yeah, sure, I think it has some serious excesses. There's animal welfare issues, the aforementioned climate problems, and just the general problems of rampant and negligent industrialization writ large. But even after all that, it's still feeding people. AI doesn't have that silver lining,^[I'm sure you disagree about this, but debating the utility of AI would be a topic unto itself, so I'm leaving it out for now.] so the comparison is unfair as well as unnecessary.
As for the IP argument, no, I didn't shoot my own argument down. Please do not mistake my good faith self-examination for a failure. Like I said, it's still perfectly viable to hate AI for that reason, and I explained why — just because there are better reasons doesn't make that one invalid. I have no idea why you'd think AI companies aren't still training on small creator's works en masse though.^[Though I'm not sure you actually do believe that! I mean, you're saying "just pull live from the web for specifics now," and... what do you think I'm talking about, if not that? What's "clean data" to you? Comments like these, where we never consented? That's not clean to me at all.] To me, that's wrong at face value, but to explain:
Training is one of the biggest things that AI companies are constantly pushing for, because they believe that's the primary vector by which the technology has (allegedly) improved. It's one of the biggest sources of the environmental problem. And even if that wasn't among their top priorities, why would they stop? Scraping is cheap. Several of them committed massive acts of literally-illegal piracy to do it. They're clearly willing to jump hurdles for even a theoretical benefit, so why quit? Why ever quit?
With regards to your anger: Alright, yeah, I understand that. I disagree, for a variety of reasons that are probably obvious by now. To me, you've either been mislead, or – knowing how AI sometimes affects people – you may have used AI yourself and become somewhat dependent on it. I dunno. But I've been mad about stuff before and said rude shit because of it, so I can relate.
I think the helpful thing to be reminded of in this context, then, is that if you want to convince people, this can't be how you try. People do not take well to "telling it how it is," or any other form of tough-love style argumentation. They get defensive. It's completely counter-productive and only helps to alienate people from you. Which is a pain in the ass, I know; slowing down to say something kinder has huge friction, while venting what you actually feel is satisfying. But unless venting is the goal, you want the former. Gentle words and impersonal, non-accusatory language can go a long way; even if people get mad it you for that, they're still more likely to introspect after.
Using data about data centers from 4 years ago. Haha I guarantee you googles data center snare using more water now. Also one is food one is not, and the this is also bad argument is stupid.
You clearly didn't read the data. It wouldn't matter if google was using 10x more. The difference between billions and quadrillions is literally a million times.