Like generally, if taking any post about how AI users are evil and/or morally deficient and/or entitled manchildren because they don't care about the environmental impact of their little toy and replacing "using AI" with "watching youtube" (or "playing games online", or "watching netflix" or "streaming music" or any other frivolous internet activity with a similar level of environmental impact) would make you no longer agree with it, that's a pretty solid indicator that it's not actually environmental impacts that you're concerned about.
@shirtshawaiian well, I *have* looked it up and Objectively speaking it's "anywhere near" and then some. The most unfavorable estimate for energy consumption from individual AI usage (the one commonly used by people when they talk about how bad using AI is for the environment) is that a single chatgpt query uses 2.6Wh of energy. Watching a 1-hour video on the internet uses 400 to 800Wh, depending on factors like video quality or what device you're watching it on. This means that the environmental impact of watching youtube (or netflix, or any other video streaming service) for an hour is roughly equivalent to using chatgpt 153 to 306 times.
And like. I am someone who doesn't use AI or fw the AI Industry, and spends a frankly unhealthy amount of my free time watching youtube. But I'm just pointing out how, once you put the energy consumption of individual AI usage in context of how it compares to the energy consumption of pretty much anything else we use the internet for, and notice how you never see statements like "I'd fw watching youtube if it wasn't so bad for the environment" from the same people, the way people on here talk about the environmental impact of AI starts looking less like a principled environmental stance and more like a post-hoc attempt to add moral legitimacy to a stance that actually has very little to do with environmental impacts.
[ID: tags. # like generally is being very generous here #i have thoughts on this i wanna come back and type abt it in tags #took me a few rereads to comprehend the post #bc Objectively ai is impacting the environment in a way different from youtube video games etc #like just replacing the text makes the past False #post* not past #like thats just misinformation at that point #then again i could be wrong i will be honest haven't researched the environmental impact of using youtube etc #but im pretty sure its not anywhere near what Al is doing #i'd fw Al if it weren't unethically sourced and also so bad for the environment /end ID]
does watching netflix, youtube, etc destroy freshwater sources and the local environment for Black and brown communities, or is the only metric "energy consumption"?
Considering that keeping any of those services running requires relying on the usage of datacenters whose carbon and water footprint had already been a cause of concern for years before generative AI was even invented, and that the practice of building datacenter infrastructure near impoverished black and brown communities definitely didn't get started with the invention of AI, the answer is: Yes, netflix, youtube etc. also destroy freshwater sources and the local environment for black and brown communities, and the fact that you're flippantly asking this question as a gotcha is further evidence of how people treat the environmental angle primarily as a way to add to the appearance of moral legitimacy over the AI Techbros™ and nothing else.
