• Dekkia@this.doesnotcut.it
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    I struggle to see why numerous scientists (and even Sam ‘AI’ Altman himself) would be wrong about this but a random substack post holds the truth.

    • Takapapatapaka@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Having read the entire post, i think there’s a misunderstanding :

      • this post is about ChatGPT and LLM chatbots in general, not AI as a whole.
      • This post claims to be 100% aligned with scientists and that AI as a whole is bad for the environment.
      • What they claim is that chatbots are only 1-3% of AI use and yet benefit to 400 million people (rest is mostly business stuff and serves more entreprises or very specific needs), therefore they do not consume much by themselves (just like we could keep 1-3% of cars going and be just fine with environment)
    • anus@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      3 days ago
      1. Have you read the post?

      2. If you’d like to refute the content on the grounds of another scientist, can you please provide a reference? I will read it