Except for Alberta, which totally tracks because it’s the Texas of Canada.

It’s not a disagreement when someone says something that is objectively and proveably false.

This is something that people need to figure out.

They said I was misleading, then they either just strait up either lied, or didn’t bother to confirm their assumption when trying to prove that. They were wrong.

You call me out for not being nice. What they did is not nice. Call them out for that.

Are you saying that states can’t regulate this? They absolutely can.

You say we like it’s everyone. It isn’t.

My province in Canada had the electricity provider cap how much gets allocated to new data centers per year at a sustainable number.

Regulation instead of outright bans are the correct path forward.

You’re wrong. The average yearly co2 output for a car is somewhere between 4-5 tons. Which lines up with the numbers in the article. So no, it’s not actively running vehicles.

I am a fan of AI, that’s correct. That doesn’t change the fact that every single one of you chucklefucks don’t seem to understand numbers, or the scale of things in the real world.

You go on and on about how bad they are for the environment, while continuing to eat meat and drive your cars around. Both of which consume resources in a scale that makes AI look like a rounding error. Until I start hearing people protesting and actually doing something about those, I’m going to assume that your anti-AI stances are bullshit and a cover for hiding your fear that they will take over your job.

If that’s the real reason, just say it, then I will agree with you. Then we can discuss how we need to change society to deal with that problem, rather than banning AI.

There are approximately 1.7 billion cars in the world right now.

That’s 1700 million for people who can’t do math.

The prices of new electronics have skyrocketed, the used market always follows so you’re right to be worried.

The title is the URL of the link, plus the actual title of the article.

That makes sense, you’re clearly not smart enough to know a second language so you can test it out.

Other than not blocking your entire phone line while you were on it, paying for hours per month of connectivity, having content take minutes to load, lacking in useful content, a thousand and one different logins with no safety systems attached, constant viruses, and no safe way to pay for things?

Nah, it was great.

Maybe you wouldn’t, but I would. You clearly don’t remember how bad the internet was when it first became available to the public.

Your emotions don’t override reality.

LLMs are excellent at translation as one significant beneficial use case.

The underlying technology isn’t unprofitable, inference alone isn’t unprofitable. It’s the research and development of better models that’s unprofitable and unsustainable.

Investment IS gambling, some people will win, some will lose.

That’s pretty much how almost every new development happens. EVs were the same, primarily funded by subsidies and now they’re cost competitive or better in many situations even without them. Cellphone networks… also heavily funded by investors and some took hits from how it all played out. The dotcom bubble. Even as far back as the Railroad boom in the UK. This is a tale as old as time.

This is both accurate and understating the issue. People can’t be downright hostile to new ideas even if it makes their life easier.

Are you kidding me? This was a University Prof, doing a proper study, published in the Cambridge University Press, and involving 1700 participants.

Did you not even bother to look up the source before jumping down my throat?

This is even further evidence of why we’re fucking doomed. Your feelings about this headline override any reasonability you have to the point where you won’t even look at the source.

People down voting a study. Hilarious.

Feels over reals. We’re fucking doomed.

Not an engineer but vinegar (ascetic acid) at full strength applied early enough during curing could be a problem. If it’s the watered down stuff for home use and the concrete was already partially cured it wouldn’t do almost anything.

It’s literally coming from Goodnewsnetwork.org

It’s not like this is the BBC here.

The air quality can be independently verified pretty easily, and we know that lower pollution reduces deaths… so while your comment is trying to get a different point, it’s not particularly good at doing so.

You’re not really correct with that statement.

Most large farms produce almost no local benefit. They don’t buy supplies locally, or sell the product locally, and these days they don’t employ that many people either.

Datacenters are not empty, they still employ people after being built.