1096
Cory Doctorow: The people who tell you ‘AI is changing everything’ are lying
(www.thenerve.news)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2026
1096 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
86934 readers
2322 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Do a little research and look at the actual numbers - yes, it could grow to become a problem, no - AI data centers aren't anywhere near that kind of problem yet. At the moment, after over a year of hype and growth, AI datacenters use less electricity than Bitcoin miners (which, in my opinion, is too damn much electricity for Bitcoin, but it doesn't seem to set the news on fire the way AI power usage does.)
A lot of really good data is copyrighted - there should be some way to cycle that benefit back to the people who made it in the first place. Bernie's soverign wealth fund idea isn't a bad one...
Good luck with that one.
Okay.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/us/articles/pollution-musk-unpermitted-xai-power-100200381.html
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/epa-exempts-off-grid-ai-power-plants-from-acid-rain-program-caps-affecting-60-sites/ar-AA28YctM
https://www.fastcompany.com/91229319/ai-data-centers-could-make-your-electric-bill-go-up-by-70
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/georgia-power-ai-data-centers-eminent-domain/
Power usage from AI data centers has already eclipsed power usage from all other data centers combined. If you can come up with a scenario where AI hasn't doubled in scale by 2030 by belching smoke into the atmosphere, I'll concede the point.
Yeah, and that's too fucking bad. If the people who made it don't want it to be used for AI training (and I don't think I've ever met a creator who has done the research on AI who does, even if they got paid), it shouldn't be.
Nukes. Possibly fusion. Possibly fusion accelerated into reality by use of LLMs to solve some of the remaining challenges.
https://ourworldindata.org/how-much-energy-do-data-centers-and-artificial-intelligence-use
https://cryptoslate.com/stop-shaming-bitcoin-when-daily-streaming-ai-and-social-media-scrolling-shown-to-consume-double-the-energy/
But the people who made it do want it to be in public libraries, accessible, seen, heard and otherwise distributed - would the majority of them rather that AI be trained on exactly what they wrote, or just hear-say?
...So you insist that AI power use isn't a big problem right now, but your best case scenario for the future is that humanity gets nuked out of existence. By nukes that were designed using help from LLMs, which they haven't been shown to be able to help with.
You seem like a very serious person who is worth debating.
As for the data use thing, firstly, I don't know why the choices are between the actual work and hearsay. I don't know where you got those two options from. I also don't know what would be producing the hearsay (human? LLM? If the latter, are we straight up admitting to copyright laundering? Also, I thought training LLMs on output of previous LLMs caused model collapse). I especially don't know why you're asking me to speculate on what creatives want immediately after attacking my ability to speak on behalf of creatives. But since you are apparently asking me to do that, I think they'd prefer the hearsay, since the point is that they don't want the model to be able to imitate their work for anyone who asks for cheap, and in so doing, put them out of a job. Or worse, have the model agree to a job they would have said no to, and damage their credibility and brand.
I'm sorry, you think this is a debate? It looks more like you parroting a bunch of whatever you like from your echo chambers, so go right on ahead.
Nukes above would refer to nuclear fission power generation which has, historically, been the cleanest least negatively impactful to human animal and plant health form of electrical power generation (per kWh generated) in history. When considering your non-renewable alternatives consider the wars fought for their control, the lives lost and ecological damage done in their extraction. When considering your renewable alternatives consider their ecological impact not only during operation, but also during construction and end of life disposal.
LLMs are accelerating research and development in the sciences and engineering - at least any actual scientists and engineers I have contact with are acknowledging their utility - not bolts of lightning from the sky universe altering changes, but helpful, in the way that computers and mechanical calculators before them were helpful - faster and easier to get things done than the previous alternatives.
Maybe think about it, then. Did you ever play "the telephone game" in school? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_game
If writers are producing valuable information, that information may be passed on to the next generation directly through their writings, or as repeated by people who have (in your esteemed estimation) read that information and then repeated it later in their lives whether intentionally, or indirectly, and usually somewhat inaccurately.
LLMs will be trained on something - would it be better for that something to be the original source material, or the regurgitations of it by employees hired by the LLM training companies? Employees who read something original in school and are now passing that knowledge into the LLM training as best they can remember?
but... but... i saw news about AI causing power grid issues,though i did also hear a power company shut down ai datacenter(s?) to free up electricity used .
i also forgot to add AI causing the ram crisis thing.
exactly,also good idea.
i think its about making people own the AI??
It's modeled somewhat on the Alaska permanent fund, which is compensating Alaskans with profits from the oil being extracted from their state.
There are unlimited ways to screw it up, but if AI suddenly becomes ridiculously profitable, having 50% of those profits cycled into the general fund could pay for things like UBI...
thats sounds awesome
Well, in part it answers the question "what if I lose my job to AI" - at least you don't become deadweight in the economy, you'd still have income to spend on housing, food and whatever else.
In theory, yes.
Reality: we already have shit welfare programs and I doubt UBI will fix it. I also doubt we'll even get to a point of UBI in my remaining career time. At least not without a lot of blood.
The present as is is pretty bad, I'd hope we can fix that before theorycrafting the future. economists 100 years prior theorycrafted 15 hour work weeks, and look how far we've come.
Reality: we have 134 federal shit welfare programs, every one of them with some needs based proctological exam required prior to qualification to apply for possible consideration for aid as a last resort when the other 133 programs won't cover the needs. That is toxic bullshit driving guilt and shame among a majority of flyover state conservative voters who are in denial that their ass is on Federal assistance so they get vocal about how bad it all is (but quietly: don't you dare cancel MY aid program, I deserve it.)
Reality: every single living breathing human being in this country NEEDS a certain amount of money to pay for food, shelter, and if you happen to be fortunate enough to own your shelter outright and grow your own food, you have a shit ton of taxes to pay, so...
If we would start with UBI, shitcan all the piddly little needs based programs that provide less than UBI anyway, people could actually put the time, effort and emotional energy that's wasted on qualification for needs based programs into something positive. Even sitting on the fucking couch getting stoned while watching Netflix brings more positive energy to our country than the welfare programs.
In effect, after all the hoop jumping and contorted political favors, we have a progressive tax system that does provide UBI plus a dose of https://genius.com/The-clash-know-your-rights-lyrics Investigation, humiliation And if you cross your fingers, rehabilitation... and then it turns around and lowers the percentage tax rate on the wealthiest, so it's the middle class that's getting screwed, and when we get done destroying the middle class who's going to pay then? UBI + flat tax makes a progressive tax system. The current US budget could be revenue neutral with $600 per month + 31% flat tax, and still give the rich as much in "incentive programs" as the population is getting in UBI.