this post was submitted on 01 Oct 2023
1139 points (97.5% liked)

Technology

59440 readers
3572 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 content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  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, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 84 points 1 year ago (2 children)

requires an intensive carbon footprint

Maybe we should focus on the collapsing ecosystem then instead of training AI datasets.

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 30 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Nuclear power means they can do both.

[–] ZILtoid1991@kbin.social 29 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Hear me out:

What if we used that nuclear power only to fix the environment?

[–] Stuka@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago

Ok, find someone willing to pay for one for that purpose.

Microsoft isn't 'we'

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You're free to invest in nuclear power for that purpose if you want.

Microsoft is investing in nuclear power to run their AI projects. They likely wouldn't be investing in nuclear power if they didn't have projects that needed it like this.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

And the U.S. government wouldn't have invested in all of the development that went into the Apollo program if they didn't want to beat the Russians, but we still all benefitted from the science and the research and the development.

[–] MonkderZweite@feddit.ch -4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

No. Nuclear power is not anti climate like the other fossil fuels, but still anti ecosytems.

[–] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

How exactly is a nuke plant antiecosystems? Under that guise, pretty much anything humans do is as such.

[–] MonkderZweite@feddit.ch 6 points 1 year ago

Uran mining & nuclear waste.

[–] oce@jlai.lu 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Nuclear power still requires huge front costs (goal of SMR is to reduce that, but first generations will not solve it), so it could be better to use them for every day life needs rather than a prospective commercial venture.

[–] ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.de -5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Only if there's a meltdown, and that's near-impossible with current reactor designs. Just don't build in very disaster-prone areas like Florida or Japan.

[–] MxM111@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think you have misread the comment you replied to.

[–] thepianistfroggollum@lemmynsfw.com 11 points 1 year ago (4 children)

AI might be a fantastic tool to help fix the environment, though.

[–] Rayspekt@kbin.social 25 points 1 year ago (1 children)

People aren't listening to human scientists and you think they'll be happy with an scary AI saving the planet?

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If they're not listening to humans or AI, then they're not going to be happy with anything and should probably be ignored.

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Unfortunately it's hard to ignore the people running your country.

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

I doubt the people running the country are worried about a "scary AI saving the planet." Their main concern is ignorant masses of voters who are scared of it.

[–] hanni@lemmy.one 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It will be used to drive more consumption.

[–] MxM111@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago

It will be used for both. The way out of global warming is going forward in technology, not backward.

[–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

We already use AI in climate change models. This is a large language model that honestly, we don't need.

[–] halva@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 1 year ago

bold of you to assume microsoft is interested in that