this post was submitted on 08 Apr 2025
634 points (91.3% liked)

Fuck AI

4855 readers
1606 users here now

"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"

A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.

AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] zerakith@lemmy.ml 43 points 8 months ago (3 children)

It doesn't solve the energy and emissions crisis we are facing but sure.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 14 points 8 months ago (2 children)

(the energy and emissions crisis are also byproducts of capitalism)

[–] zerakith@lemmy.ml 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

They don't disappear if capitalism disappears. I agree with you capitalism needs to end in order to deal with them but there are hard issues that we have to deal with even with capitalism gone.

Even if the causes ceased we would still be left with residual emissions and degraded natural systems to try and deal with and a lower EROI society to do it.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

They're "hard issues" because we don't have a centrally planned economy, we have to rely on the market to provide solutions.

Through a combination of marshaling the forces of production to build a renewable infrastructure and strict fossil fuel rationing during the build-up phase I think we could get the crisis under control within 5 years.

... I'll admit that's just vibes, though.

[–] zerakith@lemmy.ml 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I get the sentiment and I wish it were true.

Some of the issues stem from material and energy limitations regardless of human organisation structures. Fossil Fuels are stored sunlight over a long period of time that means that burning them has a high yield and that's given us a very high EROI society (one where there's an abundance of energy for purposes that aren't basic functioning).

I recommend reading The Collapse of Complex Societies by Tainter who discussing the energy limitations of society. Its before our understanding of energy limitations of technology and he's by no means a leftist but it is still a good introductory text to it.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I've read Limits to Growth. I understand there are physical limits and that we can't just grow our way through this crisis. Industrial civilization can not continue as it is.

But central planning would allow for us to transition to a lower energy society.

[–] zerakith@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I agree but there's a lot of detail about what activities a lower energy society precludes and my point is that energy intensive "AI" (mostly thinking about LLMs rather than targets applications of ML) probably aren't part of it.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Deepseek showed that these chatbots can be run much more cheaply than they have been and it isn't really necessary to build giga warehouses of servers. It might be possible to run them on even tighter hardware specifications too.

Of course, chatbots aren't AI and the fact that they're trying to use them as AI isn't going to work out anyway lol

[–] zerakith@lemmy.ml 2 points 8 months ago

Yes its clear that the path of throwing more and more resource at LLMS to improve quality has been a lazy growth focused approach that we could do better if we actually try a design focussed approach.

For me though it comes back to the fact we are facing a polycrisis and most of our resource should be focused on looking for solutions to that and I'm not sure what problem* this technology solves yet alone what problem relating to the polycrisis.

*I realise what they are designed to solve is a capitalist problem. How can we avoid paying staff for service and creative type jobs to increase profit.

[–] Zoboomafoo@slrpnk.net 2 points 8 months ago (2 children)

There'd be no crisis if we ditched oil and coal companies and just put solar and nuclear everywhere.

[–] zerakith@lemmy.ml 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Let's say its true that doing that would stop the problem getting worse (e.g. no more emissions after 5 years)*.

We still have the legacy issues to deal with and I need anticaps who are thinking seriously about what can replace capitalism to take seriously how dependent we are on natural systems that are very close to collapse. We are already passed the point where just stopping the harm is job done. The climate is not the one we have evolved and developed civilisation under its far less stable.

  • There are material and energy constraints that aren't instantly solvable and electricity production is far from the only cause of climate harm (land use and manufacturing) and some of those have major question marks remaining as to how they can be removed or electrified.
[–] zerakith@lemmy.ml 4 points 8 months ago

And none of the issues are helped by a further moving target by pursuing something that pushes our energy usage even higher like some forms of "AI" that produce very little meaningful outside of capitalism anyway.

[–] deaf_fish@lemm.ee 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

So we can have solar and nuclear oligarchs instead of oil oligarchs. Yeah, that would be slightly better

[–] Zoboomafoo@slrpnk.net 1 points 8 months ago

Well yeah, "nuclear oligarch" and "solar oligarch" just sound cooler than oil.

Other than a solar oligarch is impossible since anyone can put up panels.

And other than the premise of the thread is that capitalists are already to blame.