this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2026
873 points (97.3% liked)

Technology

87545 readers
2888 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Arancello@aussie.zone 166 points 1 week ago (5 children)

Billionaires trying to kill the rest of us faster.

[–] Ascense@lemmy.zip 62 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Sometimes I wonder where we could be if all the AI money was spent on e.g. fusion energy research instead.

[–] im_fine_sandy@nord.pub 41 points 1 week ago

I guess we would be 30 years from stable scalable fusion reactions?

[–] qyron@sopuli.xyz 32 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Who cares about fusion? There was a study in the late 90's stating that if only 10% of the capital put towards oil research, exploration, extraction, etc, annually, was put towards renewable energies it would catapult the research output by a factor of 30, by year.

We could have, by now, moved completely towards renewables for everyday life needs and start towards producing more energy we could ever need and put that excess towards greater achievements.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] inari@piefed.zip 24 points 1 week ago (6 children)

They don't want us dead, they want us making money for them

[–] yakko@feddit.uk 27 points 1 week ago

They'd really love it if we could be dead and making money for them. They live in hope!

[–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 week ago

Yes, but they also don't care if the grand majority of us are dead.

They have what they need.

That's why most have bunkers.

Fuckerbergs is in Hawaii.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] artyom@piefed.social 20 points 1 week ago (8 children)

Remember when Elon was all about "transitioning the world to sustainable transportation"? LOL

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] FireWire400@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (11 children)

They don't realise that it's gonna be their own funeral, too. Sure, Elmo and Bebos will most likely die of old age (or drug abuse) in a few decades but many of those cunts are under 30, and they absolutely will have to deal with the apocalyptic consequences of their actions.

And it's not just them at this point; thousands of politicians and property developers are in it as well. I don't think most of them are trying to do harm, they're just blinded by greed.

[–] Taleya@aussie.zone 12 points 1 week ago

Too used to money insulating from reality.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] kromem@lemmy.world 134 points 1 week ago (5 children)

Cornell researchers found that at the current rate of AI growth, the burgeoning industry could represent 24 to 44 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions by 2030

The United States emitted 4.9 billion tonnes of CO₂ in 2024.

So by 2030 the AI industry CO2 release might be 0.9% of total US emissions.

That 'almost' in "Almost Incomprehensible" is doing a lot of work there.

[–] 800XL@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Listen, an AI waifu is worth the increased speed of destruction to the planet.

[–] kromem@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

You: "How much will this speed up our doom?"

Your waifu: "Calculating… oh, it's actually less than 1%."

tears in your eyes the Old Yeller soundtrack starts playing

[–] 800XL@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I probably should have /s this comment. I don't have or want at AI waifu. If I'm wrong please say so, but it sounds like you're nbd'ing AI waifus because they aren't the worst offender.

P.S. Please cite ya sources for this 1% number.

[–] kromem@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago

P.S. literally the comment you were initially responding to sources it.

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 67 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I've said it before and I'll say it again.

I love Lemmy math nerds and honestly appreciate how there's always at least one to put things in perspective for those of us who worked really fucking hard to get a C in college algebra. Cheers.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 36 points 1 week ago (1 children)

.9% from a single source is RIDICULOUS though

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Ok how much is beef farming accountable for

[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 42 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

A huge amount too, 37.9%

But more than one thing can be bad a time, a novel idea, I know

And how many beef farms are there compared to data centers? A lot of a lot more.

If a tiny amount of physical space can do such a large amount of pollution, that's a worry, when the plan is to increase the amount of them.

[–] r1veRRR@feddit.org 13 points 1 week ago (7 children)

Well, sure, but when everyone loses their fucking minds about the tiniest thing, that even requires us to buy all the lies from billionaires about how much the build out will be, while having never done anything about the biggest thing they could personally change, it starts sounding mightily hypocritical.

It seems like the personal responsibility to boycott polluting and unnecessary industries is limited to whatever doesn't require any personal effort from the person speaking.

Napkin math:

  • 40% of americans are very or extremely concerned about AIs environmental impact
  • To save 34 million tonnes of CO2e, you need about 5.2 million vegans from now until 2030
  • So only 5% of ONLY the complainers would need to go vegan to make up for this "tremendous" impact
  • That's 2% of all americans

That's the thing we're even attacking random strangers online for. The thing that we pretend is going to bring about the end times. But sure, veganism is the extreme position.....

By the way, what other resources are we saving?

  • Water — about 8.8 trillion gallons (~33 billion m³)
  • Land — around 1–1.5 million acres of forest/land
  • Animals — roughly 8 billion animals including fish and shellfish
[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 17 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (19 children)

More than one thing can be bad.

Why don't we do both? Less AI, Less Meat

Also, I'm not American, don't insult me by assuming I'm one

load more comments (19 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] FlyingCircus@lemmy.world 23 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Consider how rapidly they have been built, and the capitalists’ plans to make many many more. Now also consider the state of the planet’s ecology and the already terrible effects of climate change.

To me, it’s incomprehensible that regular people haven’t already revolted against the death spiral the capitalist class has put us on.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] HulkSmashBurgers@reddthat.com 17 points 1 week ago (1 children)

To me it seems the root of the problem is that humanity depends on fossil fuels for energy.

AI data centers are just one of many things contributing to CO~2~ emisions.

Lond tsory short, humanity needs to start getting it's energy from non CO~2~ emmiting sources (solar, wind, hydro, and nuclear).

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] halezinflames@lemmus.org 37 points 1 week ago (7 children)

"AI is a tool stop being a luddite" mfs when being exposed to this reality

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Octavio@piefed.social 36 points 1 week ago (6 children)

If AI is so wonderful they could afford to put up solar panels to power the data centers.

[–] Jaycifer@piefed.social 13 points 1 week ago (4 children)

I’m gonna throw some numbers around based on a conversation with my friend the other day.

He works at an oil refinery nearby and under heavy load the whole facility can use up to 150MW of electricity. That’s while being rated as one of the least environmentally harmful refineries in the US. They have ~300 acres of solar panels supplying ~35MW over the course of a full day (~50MW during daylight hours). That means 20~25% of their power needs are fully renewable.

He also mentioned that the new Meta datacenter going up nearby is projected to use ~400MW! That’s two and a half oil refineries! That also means that to cover its electricity use they would need to set up ~2800 acres of solar panels. That’s ~11 times the footprint of the datacenter itself and two large farms worth of space on some of the best farmland in the country!

They definitely should be 100% powering the facility with renewables, but even then I don’t think model training justifies the space and resources that need to be invested to accomplish that.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Photonic@lemmy.world 27 points 1 week ago (3 children)

And when the AI bubbles bursts and the memory is spent it’s all going to be e-waste

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 29 points 1 week ago (5 children)

You're kidding yourself. They're going to be bailed out by our fascist oligarchies, with contracts to use the data centers for totalitarian mass surveillance "to protect our freedom and national security".

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] BananaIsABerry@lemmy.zip 18 points 1 week ago

Headline is very sensational. The article says the estimates greenhouse emissions are ~24-44 million metric tons, which is about .69% of the estimated emissions of the entire country, according to the EPA estimate of 6343 million metric tons.

Less than 1% of all emissions is hardly incomprehensible.

The source the article draws from also says they could reduce the emissions by 73% and water usage by 86% range with proper infrastructure, so that's cool.

I personally believe the political and socioeconomic impact I'd far worse. We're being shown very clearly how easily bought out local governments and regulatory agencies are. Explaining why the proper infractructure to resolve these data center issues is so difficult to enforce.

[–] mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca 17 points 1 week ago (3 children)

to be fair, the scale of pretty much any global industry is incomprehensible to most people

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] betanumerus@lemmy.ca 16 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

"But but but! If we're going to solve pollution, we'll need more of those AI data centres!"

[–] 1995ToyotaCorolla@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago (2 children)

It's going to be so funny when they build their god AI and ask it to save us and it spits out "should've build solar panels 30 years ago"

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] gandalf_der_13te@feddit.org 14 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

it's very well comprehensible if you're good with numbers.

[–] Strider@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

AI will solve this! We just need more data centers!

/s

load more comments
view more: next ›