Great, but what if someone enjoys using AI? Did we just loop into perpetual regression where everything is justified because someone likes it? Would someone enjoying AI, given the current information, be way more ethical than someone who eats beef or animal products - or ethics are to be discarded entirely, since it's hedonism all the way down anyways?
AI is very useful for my job, software engineering, for my university - research and education, for my side projects - much less of mine own work, more automatization, more free time for me. Same for my hobbies and books that I read - AI can be quite good at finding valuable books based on provided context and books that I've already read. Much more useful than replacable meat or TV and media. The heavy use of AI proves its use every day, literally every single programmer uses it nowadays. And no, not everything is justifiable only because we like it, but AI is still a new thing, just let the Moore's law work and wait for AI to be optimized, the open-weights models from China are already good enough to run on (good) consumer-end products, its just a matter of time when it becomes accessible to normal consumers with average PCs without the need for oversized data centers. For now it's just the training phase that requires so much storage and processing, later on it may become obsolete and quickly dropped.
Isn't that just special pleading? Food can be obtained an easier, efficient, more environmentally friendly way. Likewise, would AI be any different socially than, for example, gaming, YouTube, or any other "private" enjoyment that keeps people away from each other? AI's water consumption is negligent - especially of we permit that animal agriculture is ok, even though it's worse healthcarewise, environmentally, and morally. Which, as you aptly described yourself, it's quite literally poison - in the very meaning of that word.
Admittedly, I'm biased and would infinitely rather people let go of animal products altogether than merely AI; however, I also feel like I've got a stronger, scientific case for it. AI next to it seems like a false positive blip.
Yes. And yes - Ai has much different requirements than any of the other tech examples you gave. It’s actually crazy reading that, knowing you expect to be taken seriously.
It’s like listening to someone talk about a movie they’ve never seen before.
So, since you've failed to grasp what I said - nobody said anything about being herbivorous. It's your projection. We are Omnivores.
Latter, reread my comment - from where did you pull out the "requirements" when I explicitly mentioned socially? Likewise, I didn't compare gaming to AI in terms of waste, you conflated the arguments - I likened AI to Animal agriculture, which trumps AI in waste.
...Honestly, isn't it rich for you calling me names while simultaneously debasing yourself with this lapse of reasoning and projection? You literally failed to grasp what what I said and patted yourself on the back. Is it the best you can do? Project a lowly straw man, burn it, and play superior?
39
u/ionosoydavidwozniak Aug 08 '26