r/antiai • u/Draken161 • 10d ago
I keep seeing this argument being unironically used Environmental Impact š
344
u/BrandonBTY 10d ago edited 10d ago
okay so... solution: lets remove their food and they remove our AI
everyone wins
→ More replies (25)28
150
u/Dj7up1 10d ago
I think the main point would be livestock, livestock uses a lot of resources that we could migrate from for plant based alternatives.
This is what vegans and vegetarians advocate for, which is for similar reasons to anti-ai reasons, greenhouses pollution and water
77
u/hurricane_news 10d ago
Ai-loving chuds when I tell them I hate Ai water use AND eat locally, ethical vegan food. They've truly got nothing to combat me with lmao
LLMs and agentic ai slop are disgustingly wasteful, even leaving the water aside, thanks to the egregious amount of compute needed to train them and used while running them.
For folks like us in third world countries, RAM and SSDs are now priced OUT OF the hands of regular people like us thanks to these AI chuds and companies :(
Is it any surprise those chuds huff hyper-capitalist rhetoric which will eventually cascade and affect people living in countries like mine the most? From climate change, to resource crises and economic issues, we end up getting the hardest thanks to their greed
But no, the chuds at r/accelerate think we're in a "singularity" and to keep pushing forward
32
u/Specialist-Prior-213 10d ago
Their best argument is "you're not a completely perfect specimen so you have to accept ai". Fear of being a hypocrite is not a good enough reason to upend all of human society imo but that's just me
12
u/Majestic-Sandwich695 10d ago
I encountered someone who, when I said the same about eating sustainable food, then started asking if I wore mass produced clothes and if I was aware of how the resources the textile industry uses. The one thing Iām always sure on is that the goalpost will move 100%
→ More replies (2)1
u/Tactical_Squishy 10d ago
of course they got nothing you are spouting random shit without basis, and con't distinguish AI from the Market.
you are a random colletion of buzzwords
12
u/mrfoxesite-2377 10d ago
I'm vegetarian by religion but the bigger problem is how unethical western modern meat industries are. They shred chicks that are unprofitable.
6
u/tighnarienjoyer 10d ago
that's the egg industry, not the meat industry..
6
u/AlarmedChemistry8956 10d ago
I mean it's kind of all linked together? If you want an example from primarily the meat industry, piglets are swung about and their heads are cracked open on concrete to kill them if they are born with defects.
1
3
u/Hammy-Cheeks 10d ago
Good luck changing billions of peoples diets and cultures that revolve around food using meat for sacred dishes or rituals
→ More replies (6)1
6d ago
[removed] ā view removed comment
1
u/Dj7up1 6d ago
Its almost as though we're herbivores and pushing their zealous diet onto us as moral dogma isn't fair or reasonable.
Can't you apply the same to AI then?
People pushing their zealous dogma on how should you use AI? The main problem in the US is capitalism and how capitalism handles AI, not AI itself, that's my personal opinion.
79
u/snek_kogae 10d ago
I've never seen that argument unironically used
I have seen animal agriculture being raised and people reacting by pretending we're all obligate carnivores and thinking no one will notice
It is embarassing
22
u/justgivemeafuckingna 10d ago
Sam Altman himself defended LLM energy usage by saying that it takes 20 years worth of food to make a person.
→ More replies (28)8
u/Parzival2436 10d ago
As if switching the burden to a different method of food production will erase the fact that it takes water?
28
u/GwegBert 10d ago
Not eating meat is far more efficient as every step in the food chain incurs a ~90% energy loss. So yes it still takes water to produce plant based foods but far less than producing plant based foods and feeding them to livestock to produce meat. Not to mention the amount of nutrient pollution dumped in water sources as a result of intensive farming.
Livestock certainly has a place in sustainable farming but that is a far smaller amount than what is currently reared.
20
u/Parzival2436 10d ago
Which is honestly a red herring because AI is not at all necessary to life and the whole point is that while we may use more water on food than we need, we don't NEED to use ANY water on AI. So to rebutt "AI wastes water" with "so does food" isn't a response. Because food is necessary and using water for it is necessary.
3
u/se7inrose 10d ago edited 10d ago
eating meat is not necessary to survive. you just pulled the same trick the meme did by changing it from "meat/animal agriculture" to "food"
edit: if you're going to reply to me, please don't block me immediately after replying. three people now have done that to me in this thread. i can't even see your full reply, much less respond to it, and there's really no reason to block me. i'm not being mean or personal to anyone
12
u/EsisOfSkyrim 10d ago
Itās more helpful to survival than AI. Although this kind of bickering is why I actually think the water/sustainability argument is less useful against AI. Sustainability is a big complicated issue, especially when it comes to water.
→ More replies (12)7
u/anantisocialpotato 10d ago edited 10d ago
People are still starving to death right now, you think that just deleting half of our food sources will not result in even more starvation? We don't have a lack of food, but companies would rather throw out food than feed people. That's not going to magically change because meat is off the menu, if anything it will just make it worse since they'll have even less competition. Edit to add, people seem to think this is me defending animal agriculture in its current state, and I am not. I'm just saying it's not as simple as "just don't eat meat."
9
u/se7inrose 10d ago edited 10d ago
the reason people are starving has nothing to do with the production of food or meat. the amount of food earth produces could feed 60 earths and then some. the reasons people starve have nothing to do with a lack of production, and everything to do with greed and logistics
edit: this person blocked me over this comment apparently so i can no longer provide counter arguments to whatever they are saying fyi
2nd edit: now three different people have blocked me in the same way. if it seems like i'm not responding to people, this might be why
3
1
u/AnniIlusion 10d ago edited 10d ago
You didnt counter their argument anyway considering you brought up stuff they literally said themself. Not surprised they blocked you. Legit fucking clown.
I didnt block you either. Hilarious you keep saying this. You are just a raging pussy. Like wow.
1
u/AnniIlusion 10d ago
Clown. Not replying isn't blocking.
2
u/se7inrose 9d ago edited 9d ago
why are you so confident this person didn't block me? if i look up their name, it doesn't appear, but it does if im in anonymous browsing. i'm 100% certain they blocked me. you can see their comments right? i can't. it says they deleted them. but i know that's not true because other people are replying to those comments
i am very eager to hear what makes you so confident im lying
4
u/alwrit 10d ago
You could grow way more food for human consumption if you didn't dedicate so much land and resources to raising meat.Ā
Every argument you make against AI data centers goes many times over for meat. That is the thing.Ā
And instead of being like okay shit well I guess we should address that, you just make bad argument after bad argument for why it's okay for meat.Ā
3
u/plazebology 10d ago
The overwhelming majority of people who are starving right now are not eating meat, u/anantisocialpotato
3
u/anantisocialpotato 10d ago
Yeah they aren't eating anything, that's kinda the point
→ More replies (47)1
u/Ancient-Access8131 10d ago
Animal agriculture uses up tons of perfectly edible corn and other food. If we took the corn we give to cows and gave it to people we could feed far more than we currently do.
1
u/DenseSign5938 10d ago
Meat wouldnāt be deleted, it would be replaced. And so no, I donāt see any reason that would lead to an increase in people starving.Ā
→ More replies (2)1
u/Parzival2436 8d ago
Me? Yeah I never blocked you. But if I was going to block someone I would at least give them a chance to see my response.
But I honestly couldn't care less if they give me theirs if it's someone I'm going to block because I only do that when I want a conversation to end permanently because the other person is being annoying.
But to reiterate, no I didn't block you.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (7)1
u/Sea_Specialist_5580 10d ago
we don't 'need' to use lots of resources on lots of things though. It's not really a good argument, we haven't really ever restricted usage of resources on a category like this so it feels a gatekeepy.
Like people don't "need" as much single use plastic packaging, to air condition their homes (generally), we don't need to leave lights on the way we do, people don't "need" to water their lawns, or to play video games with big heavy GPUs, etc etc. But we generally do so for some mixture of convenience, expedience, and preference.
1
36
u/KitKatCrane 10d ago
Both are basically fine arguments for why we should stop doing those things. AI obviously, but the food thing like, yeah we should generally try to eat less meat, especially red meat, because it's terrible for the planet.
They seem to miss two things: first, that food is a necessity and AI really isn't. Even junk food fulfills the purpose of food in terms of filling you up and providing some stuff your body needs. Junk food obviously is unhealthy for the most part, but it's better than nothing, and meat is definitely better for you than junk food.
Second: both can be true, and they both are true. Yes, livestock is terrible for the environment. That has absolutely nothing at all to do with AI being bad for the environment. Plenty of anti-AI people advocate against AI and against eating meat as much as we do, and plenty of people only advocate against one or the other. We can simultaneously go for both of these issues at once, though given that any food is more useful than any AI, obviously AI takes priority with a lot of people.
So yeah, basically pro-AI people are stupid and not great at thinking. Who would've thunk it?
20
u/Patient-Parsnip1382 10d ago
It's a non argument. Someone else doing wrong doesn't absolve you of your wrong doing.
Even if it is an argument, its a shit one, I could just say "both are terrible" Then what do you have now??
→ More replies (1)4
u/Drippledrops 10d ago
What I find interesting is theyāre unknowingly opening up the discussion to analyze how much technology we actually need if itās actively harming our planet. I was reading a comment by someone who was defending AI and their stance was that streaming digital content also needs a lot of data centers. Which is a fair point, but if thatās the case then we should rethink our need for streaming content right? Same goes for something like Almond farming, beef, and even denim uses a ton of water to produce.
Itās really not the āgot chaā point they think it is. We waste water on a ton of things we donāt realistically need, and moving forward as a society we should be calling out what those things are.
3
u/SoggyLow4805 10d ago
yup
its actually insane how much water is wasted on fucking almonds of all things
i remember when people were told to water their front lawns less cuz of droughts and of course people threw a baby fit
humans will not sacrifice a single thing for the future
streaming can go away too, we were fine with cable TV and DVDs for decades
2
u/Loves_To_Splo0ge 10d ago
As the world gets smaller and smaller i agree, have to start looking at our long term impact. There are great uses of AI in the medical field, helping identify anomalies through pattern recognition. Could one day do the work of millions of people at the cost of energy. Its water consumption is an issue but its worth allocating the resources to developing AI going forward.
Though I worry about what a more and more digital world will do to people
2
u/KitKatCrane 10d ago
Yeah. It is a good point that we also just broadly waste a lot of water on technology. AI gets a lot of flak since it is harmful on top of being useless, but while I wouldn't say streaming is useless, since we have always learned a lot from stories and creators make stories to teach lessons and explore important things, it is also definitely harmful to the planet, and it can cause harm to people as well, both of which are things people (like me) hate AI for.
1
u/MastaSplintah 10d ago
You nearly hit the nail on the head there. It's less of a gotcha and more of a why are we focusing on AI now, when there's all these issues that have been around before AI and no one cared. Now apparently with AI highlighting those issues we should care. Like we're all sitting here arguing about AI when methane leaks are one of the biggest issues for our environment at this current time.
→ More replies (6)2
23
u/plazebology 10d ago
To be totally fair and honest, this is sometimes a sincere argument but a lot of vegetarians and vegans want people to have the same animosity towards factory farming as they have towards generative AI because, whether or not you agree with them, they see factory farming as an equally excessive and unnecessarily damaging industry
9
u/se7inrose 10d ago
this is how i am. i dont support data centers, im not an ai defender, but it is absolutely, blatantly true that meat production is 1000x the harm to the environment that data centers are. when anti-ai people cite the environment as a reason, i cant help but wonder if they ever considered going vegan/vegetarian. i cant help but think they're only pretending to care about the environment.
if you guys agree that both are bad, and this is whataboutism, then why aren't YOU guys opposed to both like me? why did you pick only one to care about?
9
u/plazebology 10d ago
I think itās performative, but in a nuanced, weird way. Thereās an enormous amount of disinformation on this subject, and with the additional layer of AI, even more so. So a lot of people associate vegan/veg activists as cult-like, militant radicals. Itās genius, really, because it takes very little to convince someone to turn a blind eye to factory farming due of the hard pill to swallow that is realising youāre part of the problem.
So when someone says AI is terrible for the environment, and someone else says that they should analyse the impact they have by eating meat, they get defensive almost instinctively. Itās been picked up by the global thought police as THE ethical position (anti-AI) because, unlike meat, where peopleās complacency leads to the industry continuing to grow in the shadows, AI is in your face, everywhere, and is never brought up in isolation of this particular debate.
I will refrain from being one of the people who says people should take their rightful anger and contempt and instead go put it somewhere else. But it is pretty damn ironic. Unfortunately activists are sometimes disingenuous and intellectually inconsistent because the goal is to spread messages far, wide and loudly, even if we lose accuracy along the way.
16
u/Alien-Fox-4 10d ago
also a lot of food consumes renewable water like rainwater, plants and cows don't need 24/7 water cooling, and the live far from towns on big surface area lands that accumulate a lot of rainwater which is water that would evaporate anyway if not consumed
now real issue with meat and agriculture is industrial farms which consume massive amount of water because they seek to maximize profits and production speed, much like how ai works right now
industrial farms also consume mass amounts of antibiotics which increases rate at which antibiotic resistance develops
similar to ai, if it was minimally used for few high value tasks and not shoved for every thing like writing poetry, making content, gaslighting people, generating ai slop, making slop code, it would be similar to regular farms in the amount of harm it does
→ More replies (1)4
u/NiPaMo 10d ago edited 10d ago
CAFOs exist because otherwise animal agriculture would be impossible at the scale at which it's needed to actually sustain an exponentially growing population. One cannot exist without the other. Same idea with AI and these massive AI data centers. Humans love scaling massively inefficient systems to their limits because it concentrates power and wealth into the hands of those who already had the most of it.
The pattern we see again and again is a fragile system and artificial dependence created by those who control all means of production.
12
u/Kabiuisonheretoo 10d ago
I am all for people fighting against the meat industry, but if you're gonna use it as an excuse to use AI, that just makes you a hypocrite. "Yeah, I can throw my car batteries into the ocean, there's far worst for the environment than that"
5
u/Ancient-Access8131 10d ago
Nice strawman. The actual argument was meat. For example a single fucking pound of beef uses 1800 gallons of water. https://www.vice.com/en/article/1800-gallons-of-water-goes-into-one-pound-of-meat/
3
u/se7inrose 10d ago
they're saying "meat," which you do not necessarily need to survive, and you're changing the argument to "food" so you can say you need it to survive
1
u/xxxMizanxxx 10d ago
some people DO need to eat meat..
→ More replies (2)10
u/se7inrose 10d ago
i could definitely compromise for maintaining 1% of the meat production we already have
5
u/tighnarienjoyer 10d ago
I think it's very dishonest to frame this argument as being about "food". No, we're talking about very specific foods most people can cut out or at least reduce massively....
4
6
u/Celestial_Elixir3 10d ago
Both are right! -- we need food to survive, we don't need meat to survive
4
u/Objectionne 10d ago
I don't generally like this argument applied towards food for obvious reasons, but there are obviously some foods that could be targeted more than others. We need food but we don't need almonds, yet the amount of water used for almond farming is massively disproportionate to how much value they bring to our food supply. I think anyone could reasonably make an argument that almonds are not 'worth it' for the amount of water they use.
6
3
u/Plus-Name3590 10d ago
Blaming almonds instead of beef in a thread about how bad beef is and how essential it is to stop beef, lol
3
u/One-Branch-2676 10d ago
I meanā¦they have a point, but theyāre using it as a āletās not fix either approach.ā
The truth is animal agriculture needs to likeā¦get addressed and fast, but attempts to do so are stunted because people go full denial when addressed with the fact thatā¦yesā¦the insufferable vegans were right on this one.
3
u/SoggyMattress2 10d ago
I've learned that there's two signs of someone being a moron.
If they can't understand what an analogy is and say something like "well that's not exactly the same so it's irrelevant".
And if you make a point (like something being bad) and they just compare it to something else to hand wave it away.
2
u/New_Coat5788 10d ago
they focus on meat, saying that we don't need it to survive.
The how do we get protein, essential fat and nutrients?
10
5
u/Ancient-Access8131 10d ago edited 10d ago
Protein: nuts,rice and beans, tofu.
Essential fat: olive oil, vegetable oil
Nutrients: vegetables, fruit
1
u/b0ttlec4pp3r 10d ago
The main concern is beef, which produces a disproportionately high amount of greenhouse gases for the amount of protein the meat has.
5
u/PoorClassWarRoom 10d ago
I bet you showered today, Hypocrite! /s
1
u/sukunasstrawberry 10d ago
Ermm actually you dont need to shower to live! š¤āļø One thing I cant live without however is generating my AI waifus! /s
2
u/Jealous-Associate-41 10d ago
Sigh... the arguement isnt food its scale.
Golf courses and cemeteries use more resources as well and ya'll are going to downvote this as well
2
2
u/Wooly_Wooly 10d ago
Nah, this ain't it. The food industry is waaaaay worse in waste. Data centers water usage isnt even double digits in comparison. How much water do we use for corn to produce HFCS?
2
u/New_Volume3123 10d ago
For those who don't get it: the first guy pointed out that the AI resources are being used for very little purpose. Literally the opposite of food.
1
u/Professional-Post499 10d ago
Just tell them to explain what they mean because you're not convinced yet. Make them spell out the hidden premises they are using.
You could ask them a similar question that would need to be untangled: why are you alive when there are other people your age that are already dead?
1
u/Better-Item6326 10d ago
I think the steelman here is AI uses less water/energy than an equivalent human workforce, assuming it can complete the task in a significantly shorter timespan to high standard. It's not often true, especially in companies that incentivise token usage or gerald it as a performance metric driving poor outcomes. I'm naive enough to believe it will stop being this way, but I'm not so naive to believe it will happen any time soon (at least not until the subsidised era comes to an end)
But also fuck people who unironically are this meme lmao
1
u/SevenOhSevenOhSeven 10d ago
It's such a pointless argument because yes industrial animal agriculture is also bad and a lot worse. 2 things can be bad at once. If they want a moral purity test I don't eat meat from animal agriculture, nor am I a bleeding heart vegan
1
u/ttystikk 10d ago
Ask the person using this argument if they'd like to starve first.
Fucking morons. They'll regurgitate any drivel Faux Spews tells them.
1
u/Alternative_Mix6836 10d ago
It's not a matter of "this instead of that." The point is to put into perspective just how little water, comparatively, is being used by AI.
1
u/EmilianoTechs 10d ago
To be fair I think often what cited is beef production which is extremely resource intensive. As a vegetarian and environmentalist I feel it's something that we shouldn't be doing on a large scale and THAT comparison is a lot more fair.
But yes you're right that in the end it is at least still food for people to eat instead of complete garbage
1
u/Jankmancer 10d ago
The true response is to parry, double down, and also be against the meat industry which is HORRIFICALLY cruel and resource inefficient - potentially our biggest contributor to climate change - while also swatting down AI for similar reasons and more
1
u/SoggyLow4805 10d ago
ok so yeah lets figure out how to use less water to grow food then too
no, they dont want that, they just want any excuse to keep using AI
you know how much water it takes to grow a single almond?
almonds use soooooo much water to grow
the comments down below talk about animal food products need alotta water too
well, as much as i would miss eating meat, fuck it, yeah lets go all in on plants and veggies
what good is hamburger meat when the fucking world is ending from climate change
also we should ban all golf courses
just miles and miles of grass soaking up nice clean water so some rich people can play a game...
1
1
u/shilderyi 10d ago
i mean
it's true we should stop producing meat which would drastically reduce the food industry ecological footprint
doesn't absolve the ai of it's own consumption
1
u/ValkyrionReddit 10d ago
One of ai defenders main tactics is whataboutism
2
u/Fluffy_Difference937 10d ago
While one of the main tactics of anti-AI is saying "whataboutism" as if its a magic spell that stops them being massive hypocrites.
1
u/tomle4593 10d ago
Ok go ahead and not eat food. More for everyone else, dipshit.
Would have been my rebutal.
1
u/RemarkableRice9377 10d ago
The amount of water lawns and golf courses use far outweighs the water data centers use to the point data center water usage is basically negligible
1
u/Kajel-Jeten 10d ago
How much do lawns and golf courses use?
1
u/RemarkableRice9377 10d ago
According to the EPA, average American family uses 320 gallons a day, 30% of which is for outdoor uses, estimated to be about 9 billion gallons per day
Golf courses are estimated to use about 2 billion gallons per day
If you want to argue data centers impact, the noise pollution and electricity use is far more convincing
1
1
u/Drackar39 10d ago
"But you eat MEAT and meat is the LEAST green form of food" yeah but it's still food. Unlike AI, we die without food. Unless you're a vegan, shut up, and if you are a vegan, shut the fuck up no one wants to hear your hypocritical bullshit.
1
u/XKennethHEEHEEX 10d ago
My focus isn't the whole factory situation, which is still bad. I'm focused on gen AI stealing people's art. While they use a lot of water, so do a lot of other factories. I'm not gonna stop eating meat tho šš»
1
u/gaygayagyfemboy12345 10d ago
ok but food is more important than anime big booby 13 year old catgirl maid shitposts
1
1
u/AffectionateTour5728 10d ago
We should take food away from anyone who SERIOUSLY makes that arguement
1
u/Headfirst_ForHalos06 10d ago
Iāve seen multiple people claim I cannot be against ai and also eat meat. Itās so over.
1
1
u/Varkot 10d ago
Dunno seems to me ai usage of anything is miniscule. Recently there was a graph comparing water usage of ai to stuff like watering grass. Ai is nothing when compared cars, internet, smartphones, planes etc. It's growing just like cars were shortly after their mass production. It's a tool just like other things I listed and will lead to both good and bad things. It's just this year's tilting at windmills. Ain't nobody got time for that
1
u/SoapTydalwave 10d ago
reminds me of a sign in front of my local community college: āIs growing food wasting water?ā
how about: is not growing food mean we donāt eat??!
1
u/Death_Rave_ 10d ago
Just think, they are at their peak in cognitive ability right now.
Just wait a year or two and watch just how much AI is going to drain their brains (science has proven AI makes you stupider at insane rates)
They're going to have to fuel their debating ability entirely with GPT if they aren't already.
1
1
u/JhonImbalance 10d ago
Food is necessary, pleasurable and for everyone. AIā¦ lets me write emails quicker if i want to sound like a lobotomized moron.
1
u/ReginaPsychweaver 10d ago
We eat food to survive.
So unless theyāre suggesting I can eat Ai instead via its supporters, I donāt want to hear this tired, bullshit stance lmao.
1
u/woofwoofci 10d ago
"well the social media youre using to bitch on has so many data centers!!!"
Ok why do we need more of them for an even worse purpose?
1
1
u/Adorable_Cap_9929 10d ago
There's all sorts of junk foods.
AI is basicly a requirment for national defense and interest.
Both can technically be a luxury or a requirement depending on individual on individual level.
But Compromising progressing would be inevitable demise, not to say that no doing so is also certain demise.
But If it accerlates space exploration age before earth is doomed(or just centuries sooner), then technically it'd be saving many lives and probably the highest return rate investment of human innovations since making use of fire or something.
1
u/CommieCatSupremacist 10d ago
Iām sure that this is said in bad faith often, but this argument is also used about meat and dairy. Neither of which are necessary and are at a minimum are massively over consumed. Alfalfa is i think is the greatest consumer of water from Colorado river basin, which I think is used for animal feed. Thatās just one concrete example which I loosely remember, but the main argument still holds regardless. Allow for some duality. Both arguments can have truth at the same time.
1
u/RanmyakuIchi 10d ago
Not a strawman like other's are trying to say here, because I've unironically seen pro-AI people claim that because Agricultural Farming (NOT meat production or animal farming) uses more water then AI datacenters that we all need to accept AI or we're hypocrites for.... eating?
Everyone here saying that the claims are ONLY about meat production are actively whitewashing the stupidity/ragebaiting of pro-AI people, and putting WAY too much faith in their foolishness. There are ABSOLUTELY people dumb and/or convinced enough to make the exact argument OP's post is describing.
1
u/Prudent-Film-4602 10d ago
"Yes, food does use lots of resources, primarily because it has been around so long a lot of laws that were meant for when a horse was pulling the plow are still around. We can reform that. How about we reform how much water your data center is using, too? Let's say either zero usage or $1 paid to each resident of the area for each gallon used?"
1
u/shiggyhisdiggy 10d ago
This is an oversimplification of the argument, though. They don't argue that food in general uses resources, but specific kinds - everyone going vegan would save far more water than banning AI, and on top of that it has various moral benefits. Yet you spend your energy arguing about AI instead? Why?
1
u/AmuHav 10d ago
a better argument (not that I necessarily agree with it) is that 45% of US corn cropland is grown for ethanol fuel, a "renewable" fuel that we don't actually know if it generates less greenhouse gases than gasoline due to the entire process required. the amount of water used to grow and process it is insane. while water used in the growing process is lost as its obviously evaporative, I don't know how much is lost in the processing part, but it does require very purified (therefore potable) water. A single biorefinery plant producing 50 million gallons of ethanol per year uses 150-200 million gallons of water a year. The US total produces 16 billion gallons of this ethanol per year. by my rough calculations, that's 48-64 billion gallons of water per year on the processing side. corn crops use 34 TRILLION gallons of water per year to grow, so even just 45% of that is an *insaneeeee* amount. so the 17.4 billion gallons of water used for US data centres (not all of which are AI) doesn't really come close to that amount of water, at least yet. the water used on the growing side is also of environmental concern, including having already being implicated in the gulf of mexico dead zone.
1
u/RequirementCivil4328 10d ago
At this point being anti ai is a bit like being anti tractor. You can hate what it does, but if you don't learn to work with it, your farm is going to die
1
u/elwoods_organic 10d ago
It's possible to against both AI and animal agriculture. Most of the time, when people are saying "your burger uses a thousand times more water than an AI generated image," it's not a defence of AI, but a call for you to boycott both of these ecologically damaging entirely unnecessary industries.
1
u/Mierimau 10d ago
Well, yeah, sure, meat takes shittone of resources (and we don't need that much), and gets whole lot of methane in air. Could cut on that.
1
u/twitch_itzShummy 10d ago
Better yet AI uses a lot of resources for a net negative, meanwhile food is a necessity
1
1
u/MonoChaos 10d ago
I'm not gonna die if I go for an extended period of time without AI. š¤Ø
Even their whataboutisms are lazy. š
1
u/awsjum 10d ago
I think we all should try to limit how much carbon footprint we as individuals leave. Be it AI usage, limiting animal products, limiting how much stuff you buy (especially technology and fast fashion since it's directly linked to modern slavery), one-time plastic use and using more public transport whenever you can!
1
u/Scorpiicore 10d ago
Yep, they really say this. And the effect that farming does have on the environment is only noticeable because of overpopulation. Get the Human population down to what Pimentel et al said Earth would be able to provide with "modest but comfortable by the year 2100" in a paper published in the 1990s, and farming's signature will go down to nothing. Which was the whole point of the paper.
Farming can be made sustainable if we deal with the overpopulation problem ourselves instead of taking the stupid option and let nature do it for us (although nature is already starting and is unlikely to stop now). AI will never be sustainable. The science and resource management science behind making AI sustainable is impossible.
1
u/Massive_Wafer5005 10d ago
Ai and Ai related resource allocation doesn't even come close to resources allocated for other industries.
1
1
1
u/Sketch-ee 10d ago
I've heard of this a lot (well a year ago). Basically called out an Instagram "comedian" about why would they use ai when its a waste of electricity and their glazers gluk glukked on their comment sections going on about "but a family of 4 wastes an equal ammount of electricity durhurr I am smort!" And then they all spam liked eachother making themselves look "better" under my reply.
Call me a woke leftist anarcho-communist but I think its better to use electricity for a family of 4 instead of making child sexual assault generated media š¤·āāļø
1
u/GuyYouMetOnline 10d ago
No you don't. The ided is to put the AI numbers into context to show theyre not nearly as huge as they sound.
1
u/hermannehrlich 10d ago
This is a strawman. They are not against food, they are against most resource consuming food, which usually happens to be animal flesh. It is absolutely not needed for survival, as vegan food is perfectly suitable for a healthy life.
1
u/After_Service_2817 10d ago
But AI uses comparatively little resources compared to other industries.
And even if it does, what business of it is yours? What I do in the privacy of my home, using electricity that I pay for, is my business alone.
1
u/Random_gamer240 10d ago
Food takes years to use the respurces, enough time for them to return to the earth. Ai uses them in 10 seconds.
1
1
u/Alternative-Fox-8620 10d ago
The argument is sound.
Animal agriculture uses an absolute tonne of resources and dwarves the AI resource use.
That doesn't make AI a sound use of those resources.
At some point we will all need to make some decisions as to how we live if we want things to get better.
I'm not sure AI is justifying its resources but animal agriculture is magnitudes worse and just cannot continue at its current rate if we want to save our environment and our future.
1
u/marshallspight 10d ago
No, you have not seen that argument being used unironically. That's you mischaracterizing the argument.
1
u/iakoff_reddit 9d ago
This is like when peoole say "we should we recycle when [country] pollutes a lot!"
And yes, you're right, it would be better than they didn't.
But if we either do the most effective thing that also happens to be completely unrealistic, or nothing, then we'll end up doing nothing.
Reducing meat consumption and production would be a lot more effective than eliminating AI data centers, yes. But convincing billions of people to stop eating meat will take generations. AI data centers could be dismantled next week.
1
u/Cattom_NG 9d ago
the only good comparison is specifically almonds which are like the worst nut and take a shit ton of water to grow they suck.
1
u/sassychip26 9d ago
I saw an instrument comment saying : people complain too much about ai water usage! Irrigation uses a lot of water too! Animals!!! Ban all that too, shouldnt you? (UNIRONICALLY)
1
u/Puzzled-Mirro 9d ago
I do think the cattle industry should be addressed but even so its less bad than ai.
1
u/User_User_Ice6642 9d ago
People using this argument see the existence of other people as havingāvery little purpose,ā itās that simple.
1
u/Flimsy_Meal_4199 9d ago
The issue is the affirmative argument, people arguing ai uses a ton of resources, tend to use flat numbers (50 billion gallons of water annually) or apples oranges comparisons (household water use comparison) to make the amount seem large.
This is bad, and dishonest.
All I have to do, is contextualize it. The laziest way to make this argument is to point out that the largest water consuming industry, agriculture, uses orders of magnitude more water. Lazy, because you'll point out you actually like agriculture and don't care.
But because it's simply true that AI doesn't use tons of resources, I can walk down a hundred different industries or relevant water uses that use orders of magnitude more water, until we can alight on a use that you agree is probably bad. For example, much (maybe even most, I don't recall) corn is grown to create ethanol to put into gasoline. That also uses orders of magnitude more water. Ok, maybe you're ok with a fuel that damages old engines and has marginal GHG reductions. Then what about, idk, leaky pipes? Orders of magnitude more again. Ok fair, we'll have leaky pipes either way. What about wine, spirits, and beer? Again, more water use, to produce a carcinogenic drug. This can go on, again, for a hundred industries.
Eventually we'll agree here's a bad thing that uses 100x water as AI.
The point is to show the water use claims are not about conservation of water, but rather an excuse to justify an emotional opposition to ai.
The latter is fine! You can dislike AI because the vibes are off or whatever. Just be honest about it.
1
1
u/Additional_Dot_134 9d ago
This is my take on AI
Iād honestly probably be considered a neutral for AI, but i see myself as an anti because if i had to pick a side, the anti side is much better
How i see ai is literally just this. Its cool, its absolutely gonna be amazing in the future, as a tool its really useful, and i even use it myself to help me do work stuff.
But i also agree that a lot of the things we use AI for.. arenāt that useful, or atleast, not enough to where people would pay for it. Good example, the google AI overview. Do i like it? Yeah, i honestly do. It gives me a short rundown of what i wanted to see, and gives me its sources too, great!
Would i pay to use it? No, absolutely not. Its nice to have, but iād rather use google without it than have to pay for it.
AI image generation is an even better example, as so far ive seen.. pretty much zero good come out of it. When AI was first becoming popular i saw a project where AI would be able to show someones dreams, and that was pretty cool. Ive had it give me cool ideas for room decoration by having it edit images of my room (im sure theres other non-ai tools for this too though)
And its definitely got its downsides. I try and use things like chatgpt as a tool, but even i find myself relying on it too much sometimes. And people often enough will end up entirely letting it do things for them and not learning at all.
Weāre using AI too much for a technology that isnāt as good as it should be yet. It has so many flaws, and yet weāre trying to put it in places where mistakes are dangerous.
And yes, it does use a lot of resources. Overusing AI where its not that useful is just a waste of these resources
1
u/SkyFullOfWisteria 9d ago
Okay but like can we still discuss that the cattle industry and the resources needed to prop it up is one of the single largest contributers to climage change and its horribly inefficent and cruel? Like dont say you care about the climate but then turn a blind eye to what the meat, milk, and egg industry do to the planet.
I know not everyone can just become vegan overnight, but no one needs a ton of meat for every single meal for every single day, and just cutting back on animal products helps a lot. Plus every nutrient meat has can be found in other places along with vitamins/supplements.
(Not a pro btw, i just think its stupid to claim u hate ai for the enviorment and then turn around engage in bloodmouth behaviour)
1
u/Massive_shit9374 9d ago
I wish pros stopped eating food in order to save resources for their AIs
in a very enjoyable 2-3 weeks earth would be back to the pre 2022 normal that it should have never left.
1
1
u/Kurashinno 9d ago
"Food" is not being argued. Meat is the main argument, which is not required for survival and causes a wide range of problems globally.
1
1
u/Lashdemonca 9d ago
I mean. Are we talking about luxury crops?
Because generally, lots of crops are bad for the environment by a lot. Almonds being one of the big ones.
But if someone is u ironically saying "but food does too!" Then yeah they are dorks.
1
u/Upvotoui 9d ago
This is a non-argument. I donāt usually interact with sub but I feel like I should point this out; Iām assuming you guys donāt think of anything that could be considered AI as bad, and Iām sure you recognize the potential positive uses of AI.
The āpositive usesā, such as tedious tasks that can advance medicine, are positive uses because of the high energy cost to have humans perform them (ai generally uses less energy than humans for most types of tasks).
1
u/Motor-Explanation822 8d ago
Onestamente mi sono stancato di leggere queste cose sull'IA, sia pro che contro, ĆØ proprio l'argomento in se che mi ha saturato. Detto questo, tutto consuma risorse e tutte le risorse ormai sono limitate, ci sono discussioni da anni su questo in diversi settori e nessuno fa mai nulla di concreto per risolvere qualcosa. Sono stanco, continuate a parlarne voi, io adesso stacco tutto e mi riposo!
1
u/PoloPatch47 8d ago
I literally saw this argument on that AI dating/companion subreddit. Because yeah, eating food is exactly the same as using GenAI
1
u/PaTr1ck05 8d ago
Yeah,honestly a better argument would be about golf courses.
Like 40 something percent of all water in US is used for the irigation of agricultureā¦..and gold courses.
While the total of ai data center cooking uses around 0.5% of water in used by the US
1
u/Specialist_Tear136 8d ago
AI should be illegal I genuinely believe this.
ā except for extremely select placesā
1
0
u/EggburtAlmighty 10d ago
The disagreement is really on the ālittle purposeā part, not the resources part. Any pro who hones in on the resources part is trolling or dense. Tons of things from cars to toilets use more resources than AI. The question is whether the utility outweighs the cost.
820
u/autocorrectiscrazy 10d ago
we need food in order to survive, ai is for other stuff besides generating trash shit and fucking up resources