• Shindo66@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 hour ago

    I know this will be buried but it seems Ai isn’t worth anything really if these giant complexes are the price. Just straight up monetarily, who benefits?

    • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      38 minutes ago

      These companies are all racing to dominate the market. Eventually one will win, largely through government contracts. Then all the infrastructure will be used to further propagandize, kill and spy on us.

  • LilBobbyTables@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 hour ago

    Net zero doesn’t mean lowering pollution btw. Net zero means essentially cancelling out any pollution by planting trees, buying carbon credits, etc. It’s possible to be the biggest polluter and also net zero as a company. If that actually helps the planet is another story.

    • 7101334@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 hour ago

      Most “we plant a tree for every _____” things are just scams. They plant the trees, sometimes as monocrops that could never become a healthy forest, and usually without monitoring the trees or guaranteeing their survival into at least early-maturity.

      • Kindness is Punk@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        While this certainly could be true, I would say it’s only that way because state and federal government refuse to invest in our aging energy grid.

        with proper taxation and directing that towards upgrading the infrastructure, supporting it is absolutely possible.

  • jballs@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    7 hours ago

    It would also be in stark defiance of Amazon’s stated climate goals, which center on reaching net-zero carbon emissions by 2040.

    That’s not lost on the tech giant. But as Amazon spokesperson Margaret Callahan told the NYT, the “world looks different now than when we co-founded the climate pledge.”

    What the fuck? They looked at the world recently and said “yeah, climate change isn’t as much of a problem as it was before”?!?

    • Mannimarco@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      15 minutes ago

      They mean politically, they can get away with this now without blownack, they never gave one single shit about the climate

    • kyub@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      4 hours ago

      “current gov allows us to do anything so we don’t care anymore because that,'s cheaper”

    • skozzii@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 hours ago

      It’s those pesky Canadians again, it’s all their fault for mismanaging the fires, not the fact we are cooking ourselves alive.

    • D_C@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      6 hours ago

      No, they looked at the blatant corruption from Fatboy McKiddieFiddlers regime and figured, “eh, what’s the point of pretending to give a shit. No fucker has got the balls to stop us from fucking thing up.”

  • yarr@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Don’t forget to use your paper straws people! It’s the average person that causes harm to the climate, not businesses. Maybe we should give them more tax breaks.

    • Tja@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      7 hours ago

      You’re going to be surprised when you find out who consumes what businesses produce…

        • Tja@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          6 hours ago

          Not only that, actively consume products and blame the creators of the products for the consequences.

          • Avicenna@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            6 hours ago

            I don’t know, if you actively are reducing your shopping from amazon and try to stay away from their products, I wouldn’t call you a hypocrite for criticising them. And many people now a days are doing just that, so you can’t really assume right from the start that a person is being hypocritical.

  • DaddleDew@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    Remember that Stargate SG1 episode where they find themselves into a huge underground facility that is under attack by external forces. Jack O’Neill accepts to pilot one of their drones to help defend the complex from a wave of bombers and is infuriated to learn that the attacker’s bombers were manned while he believed they were unmanned.

    spoiler

    At the end it turns out the facility was actively poisoning the entire planet, threatening to wipe out all life and the “attackers” were simply the people of the rest of the world trying to stop it.

    That is what the Amazon data center is to me.

  • ryphez@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Weren’t they supposed to be carbon neutral by 2030? Sure seems like they’re trending the wrong way

  • TrackinDaKraken@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    16 hours ago

    It doesn’t need to be so, the asshole billionaires just don’t give a single fuck about anyone but themselves. They don’t even care about their kids.

    • eldavi@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 hours ago

      they wouldn’t be able to do shit if we didn’t enable them to do it; point the anger at the right place.

  • cogitase@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    15 hours ago

    It’s in one of the sunniest places in the US too. 6.0 kWh/m²/day of solar irradiance. There’s even already a relatively large solar farm in the same county.

    • A_norny_mousse@piefed.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Wait, it does not run on solar, even partially? JFC.

      edit: yep.

      Amazon has confirmed its investment in a massive gas-burning power plant in Texas, meant to supply up to 7.65 gigawatts of energy to a planned data center in Pecos County. Should it come online as planned, the plant’s 35 turbines would be allowed to spew 33 million tons of CO2 a year, the NYT notes, which would easily make it the largest single fount of emissions in the country.

      It would also be in stark defiance of Amazon’s stated climate goals, which center on reaching net-zero carbon emissions by 2040.

      🤦

      Does greed know no end in this country?

    • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 hours ago

      This thing is 7.65GW. The largest solar array in the US is 900MW and uses 4600-5000 acres. The scale to do this on solar alone is bonkers, but not impossible.

      You would need to at least 4x provision it which means a 30GW solar array, and 156,000 acres, before getting into battery storage for non sunny times.

      It’d be nice to use some solar absolutely, but this is better suited to nuclear.

      Edit: And if you aren’t storing / over provision to store, then you still need the peak output from another source anyway and these things likely always run near peak as they are constantly in use, so the size of the non-solar source doesn’t reduce, only its output during the sunny day time hours. So you end up with 7.65GW of natural gas still, but maybe they also build a 1GW solar farm on the side.

      • postmateDumbass@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Nuclear power run by a publicly traded company worries me.

        Because there will be shareholder value vs. safety trades.

        • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 hours ago

          At this scale everything is bonkers. The hoover damn is 2GW.

          That severely limits where you can place it, probably more than solar. Now you need all that extra water, and height differential that can be at that scale.

    • dan1101@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      14 hours ago

      If I were king they could run data centers with solar and fans. No outside power, no outside water.

      • CIA_chatbot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        14 hours ago

        You realize they are for sifting through the massive amount of surveillance data using AI right? They aren’t for ChatGPT. They are for categorizing and watching every person on the planet 1984 style.

        • 🍉 DrRedOctopus 🐙🍉@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          10 hours ago

          that’s my biggest worry, more data centers won’t lower the cost of LLM tokens.

          The only reason they want so much compute power is to have AI agents watching and annotating everything flock cameras see.

          not just license plate readers (a raspberry pi could handle that). but everything.

          My paranoia is that in 5 years, if you protest, the police will come to arrest you with a long list of every “crime” you have committed: driving holding you phone, no seatbelt, a recipt flew out of your pockets… a long list of petty meaningless violations.

          and they’ll have that list for everyone.

          • willington@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            cake
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            10 hours ago

            They are already unpopular now. Wait till the pigs dive even deeper in popularity.

            They might convince the general population that the first amendment is not worth exercising, and instead we all neet to contemplate military style resistance.

            Nobody apparently wants to bring trouble to themselves as long as there is still anything left to hope for. However that calculus can change once the powers that be engineer a life even more glaringly worthless than it already is. Lots of people are quiet quitting or not having children already. That trend will accelerate even further.

            • Tja@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              7 hours ago

              If ice killing random people on the street, on camera, multiple times, didn’t cross that line, a random construction site won’t do shit.

        • joe@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          14 hours ago

          Do you have a source for this?

          Running an LLM is significantly less resource intensive than training it, and all indicators are that these data centers are being built to keep up the breakneck pace of companies racing to create AGI.

          • 4am@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            14 hours ago

            They’re literally buying up all the computing resources so that we can’t get any.

            We will all have to communicate though walled gardens on dumb tablets.

            They can quickly summarize vast amounts of text looking for any “undesirable” patterns using LLMs.

            We will all have to rent computing time from them.

            This is the point, this has been the point for a long time, it’s just that LLMs were the perfect storm of “impressive to rubes” and “resource hungry”. Micron has already eliminated its consumer brand, Crucial. Hell, Peter Thiel (the Palantir guy) goes around giving talks about how “being against AI is the antichrist” just to make sure that all the remaining brainwashed sheep fall for the ruse.

            This shit is not hard to see. They want to own our future entirely and they want us to pay them for the privilege.

            Capitalism was a fucking mistake.

            • AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 hours ago

              The future of this planet is a desert wasteland. They can rule over the fucking ashes. Nothing beside remains.

          • A_norny_mousse@piefed.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            14 hours ago

            all indicators are that these data centers are being built to keep up the breakneck pace of companies racing to create AGI

            Amazon? Nah, it has commercial interest in this, not scientific*.

            Also, MAGA is pushing this like crazy, and destroying the planet in the process. For the next 10 years there’s by law practically no regulation wrt anything AI.

            That said:

            keep up the breakneck pace of US-American companies racing to create AGI more AI, or ELLM = even larger language models

            This affects the whole world, esp. if other governments (looking at EU) simply swallow the narrative hook line sinker.

            Fuck This Shit

            * If you say they are chasing AGI you mean that they are willing to make decisions that will further that goal, not just further profits. And I do not believe that for one second.

            • joe@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              14 hours ago

              I didn’t mean to imply it was scientific, any more than what OpenAI is doing is scientific. It’s all commercial.

              I’m not sure what the rest of your comment is supposed to mean. They are chasing AGI. That doesn’t mean they’ll create it, of course, but that’s what they’re aiming at.

              • A_norny_mousse@piefed.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                14 hours ago

                Nono, I’m sticking to my statement. If you say they are chasing AGI you mean that they are willing to make decisions that will further that goal, not just further profits. And I do not believe that for one second. I also don’t believe AGI is anywhere in the near or even medium future for us.

                That said, they might say that they have such lofty goals.

                • joe@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  13 hours ago

                  I’m not going to dwell on this much longer, but your mistake is that AGI is a lofty goal, and not driven by greed.