A) That’s called a hydrogen car, and they exist already.
B) Never, the output is water. Then you just use enegy to split the water back into hydrogen and oxygen before burning it back into water. Just add energy from your preferred renewable source.
That is the most defeatist argument I think I’ve heard. You’re essentially suggesting that it’s too late to fix the biggest issues, so you’re going to protest things that won’t actually have an impact just because it’s easier.
You’re right that people could be doing multiple, I’m just pointing out they aren’t doing that.
At this point it’s clearly either just performative activism, or people are using the environment as an excuse to hide their worries about the economic impacts that may affect them (completely valid)
The third option is that people are so poorly educated that they actually can’t think rationally about this issue. I’m not ruling that out at this point.
Where’s the protests over golf courses though? Why are you showing up to an Anti-AI protest, but not organizing one for golf courses?
This is the biggest thing that’s pissing me off about these anti-AI for environmental reasons folks. People are literally getting into giant SUVs to drive to anti-AI datacenter protests, then stopping off to get a steak to cook for dinner on the way home.
The amount of fuel they just burned, and the amount of energy and pollution beef production generates for that steak are quite literally orders of magnitude worse for the environment than AI datacenters.
Yet nobody is protesting combustion vehicles, or even oil and gas companies at this point, and very few people choose to not eat meat (and even a lot of those don’t do it for environmental reasons).
Rational people worried about the environment, pollution, or water usage would target the worst offenders. Yet here they are protesting in massive numbers for something that’s less than well under 1% of global energy use.
The one exception (it did age decently) is Austin Powers.
They must have used the time machine to look forward and figure out what they could get away with and then danced as close to the line as possible.
I would honestly say it’s more Apathy than Propaganda.
Most people simply don’t think they can do anything, that it wastes their time, and therefore just tune it out and try to pretend it doesn’t exist.
I was looking for this particular users idea, not the broader definition. I work in this field and am well versed on ML.
How do you differentiate AI and Generative AI?
Do you mean Generative Pre-trained Transformers (GPT) as in what we see with large language models?
The investment bubble may collapse on them, but the usage isn’t going anywhere but up. I don’t know why you think it’s some sort of scam. If it was such a scam, companies that have been using it for two years already would be throwing it in the trash and instead they’re buying up more capacity.
I have legitimate business use cases for it today, and my company can’t get hands on hardware or even available compute from the big players because it’s in such high demand.
It used to be that most of the compute was going to training models, but that hasn’t been the case for a year now. The majority (and it’s increasing fast) is inference at this point and while it doesn’t live up to the “It will do your entire job and get you fired” it’s definitely useful in many situations.
If you look at what Russia controls of Ukraine at this point, they’re getting literally nothing from it. The Donestsk region of Ukraine has lost almost half it’s population (about 3.5 million people have left) since the start of the war. The major cities don’t have consistent water, heat, electricity, or even food supplies. Russia is getting nothing from “controlling” it.
The war may still be going on, but the only reason is because the Russian military is literally willing to shoot people that try to refuse. If there was any allowance for a second government option, Putin would already be gone. The US may be slipping into autocracy, but Trump is not even close to that entrenched or powerful.
What does “in control” mean in this case? How do you “control” a city?
Being there with the military and not having an opposing force is one thing, they could do that. What benefit would they get out of such occupation though?
There’s usually one of 2 purposes to an invasion, capture the territory and make it part of your own for financial purposes, or to kill everyone (or a large portion) to free up space for your own people to take over.
However, getting anything financial out of invading Canada is impossible realistically. They can’t just come in and directly capture the tax dollars or something, none of that even exists physically at this point for a start, and any sort of force they use is just going to result in people refusing to pay taxes, the economy tanking, and them not getting anything anyways. They would have no way to enforce anything against such mass resistance.
They already get most of the resources we produce, the Oil in Alberta almost entirely flows to them for example. If they invaded they can say goodbye to that, even the US military couldn’t protect that much pipeline from terrorism.
There’s just no useful goal to invading Canada in the first place, so if they do it out of pure spite they’re going to have to contend with their own population being absolutely livid about it. Like full riots in every US city livid. It will make the Palestine and BLM protests look like an episode of Mr. Dressup.
The soldiers who were there remember. What trump says may impact people who have no idea, but soldiers aren’t just magically forgetting they spent months working with those people.
I don’t think you realize how many US military personnel have worked directly with Canadians regularly as part of their career, especially the ones in charge of everything. We are pretty much constantly running military training exercises and joint missions at this point.
We’ve got a ship docked at your base in Hawaii right now. Pacific Rimguard 2026 just wrapped up in Asia with another one of our warships. There are hundreds of Canadian military personnel permanently stationed at NORAD. We spent 13 years in Afghanistan with the US.
Even if only 10% were intentionally fucking up, it would still absolutely cripple the capabilities.
Not to mention the complete lack of a useful target. What are they going to do to “capture” the country? Kidnap the prime minister? Our system doesn’t actually have a problem handling that. You could hold our entire parliament hostage and you still wouldn’t actually be able to get Canadians to do anything useful. What would the point be?
Taking our the 10 military bases we have? We wouldn’t even give a shit, they don’t run or do anything that we need to function as a country.
Afghanistan was a shit show, and the people were a different skin colour and spoke a different language, soldiers could at least somewhat talk themselves into keeping things “separate” mentally. However, do you think the average American soldier is going to be able to shoot people that looks like their own brother, sister, son, daughter, father, mother, etc. they left at home without immediately having a mental breakdown?
We saw this kind of shit already happen between Russia and Ukraine, where lots of Russians just decided to surrender or do their least. It doesn’t work well, even with a dictatorship willing to shoot you for disobeying. If the US military tried to punish or shoot soliders en masse for refusing to invade Canada you’d have riots in every single city in the US.
They wouldn’t lose immediately, they would have lost before they even attacked. Their own military personnel would likely refuse orders, sabotage the mission, desert, or surrender immediately. I’m sure there would be a few people willing to follow orders, but you can’t run an invasion when 1/3rd of your own soldiers are actively attempting to prevent you succeeding.
How should we execute people who throw lit cigarette butts out their car windows?
Nah. There’s not really any significant benefit to making such changes from a government perspective.
Did they interview people who died from covid because they didn’t get vaccinated?
Or people who got injured by having covid but not actually dying?
It’s absolutely a stunt.
While I don’t dispute that the vaccine caused some issues for a very small number of people, the discussion isn’t “is it perfect” it’s “did it help more people than it hurt” and the answer is clearly yes.
People crash into median barriers on the highway and get hurt all the time. Those barriers are meant to protect people, but can themselves sometimes cause injuries that might not have happened if they weren’t there.
I don’t see anyone arguing to remove road barriers though, because on balance they help more than they hurt. Significantly fewer overall deaths for some increase in injuries is a good trade.
What exactly is infuriating about this?
Would you rather have just got a text based email?
A PowerPoint screenshot?
They were never going to spend any design time or resources on this kind of thing if AI want available.
Yea, the absurdity of imagining Trump actually putting on skates makes this comic almost a self-own.
There’s no way he would ever go on the ice with Carney, let alone be able to catch him when he’s there.
https://www.goodreads.com/series/49441-the-talents-universe
The talents books by Anne McCaffrey
Irrational protests are not helpful. Doing something just because it’s popular is called a fad.
Anti-corporate sentiment and protests are hilarious, there’s already an easy mechanism to punish companies. Don’t buy their shit, or support other companies that buy their shit. However, that rarely works because “the public” doesn’t actually care and just wants cheap shit.
We could put oil companies out of business in a couple of years by simply changing our collective individual purchasing habits. That would require a sacrifice in lifestyle quality that most people aren’t willing to provide though.
I wonder how many people go to these ai-datacenter protests, then go home and ask chatgpt to help them write a birthday card joke for their friend/family member. I would bet large amounts of money that it’s a sizeable percentage of vocal critics.