this post was submitted on 05 May 2026
490 points (98.0% liked)
Technology
84354 readers
3484 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The article, as usual, makes no comparison to the environmental impact of companies like McDonalds (who use PER DAY what every AI data centre combined in the world uses PER YEAR, not companies like Shell or BP who are orders of magnitude worse than that. This is the usual anti-ai fear-mongering bollocks.
Should Google have installed it unasked? No, that's bullshit, possibly illegal bullshit but honestly considering how disingenuous the environmental impact is I can't trust the legal stuff that I don't know about either. But it is not an environmental catastrophe as whoever wrote this article would like you to believe for some reason.
Honest question: why are the haters pushing their nonsense? What do they have to gain?
edit: As usually the haters and useful idiots provide nonsense counterpoints and downvote because they don't have laugh reacts to demonstrate their groupthink and wilful ignorance. I really wish they'd all shut the hell up, they're annoying!
What do you think this nano model actually achieves?
Because I know why someone would want to eat a burger, or fill up a tank, but why would anyone want this running in their computers?
Just because you can;t think of a use for AI doesn't mean it's useless, twit, it means you l;ack an imagination. Also that's really not the point, the point is one of the major claims in the article is bullshit. Do you have any comback to that? No?
Jeez, calm your tits, I think I asked politely enough so I wouldn’t deserve this kind of response.
My question was what do you think this particular model does, not what is achievable with AI in general. And I’m asking because a model that weights 4GB is not some trivial thing that every Chrome user wants or needs loaded in memory.
look im far from a monger but this argument makes no sense. mdconalds makes food. which is a necessity. In addition its actually pretty well known for its efficiency. So its a question of output vs input. Now granted. super unhealthy but they don't sneak mcdonalds into your home cooked meal while your not looking. This article is far from nonsense.
Food is necessary, McDonalds is not. Shut up.
Grocery stores are unnecessary too, you can just go kill/harvest/forage your own food. Shut up.
No, that's a really fucking dumb argument. Stop being an idiot
Take your own advice. I can grow and raise my own food, so the grocery store is just a convenience. You're just angrily trying to draw a meaningless line in the sand to prop up your ~~ego~~ argument, and it shows.
No, I'm angrily calling out bullshit that is bullshit, but you thought Terminator was a documentary and so will immediately believe anything that says AI is bad no matter now outlandish rather than actually learn anything
thanks.
What for? Coming out with a fucking stupid counterpoint? Weird thing to thank someone for
I'm gonna need some references to back up those energy claims. I do not see McDonalds (or any other restaurant) operating methane gas turbine generators because the energy grid can't keep up with their power demands.
I would assume the enormous environmental impact of McDonald's comes from the amount of meat, specifically cow, they are responsible for
Can you convert those cow meats into watts? I was asking about energy usage in the context of that specific claim
Sure. 1 kcal ≈ 1.162 watt-hours.
Oh, some whataboutism. Great.
Also great to know you don't have to pay to get storage in your devices, otherwise you'd be quite unhappy to see it taken out of your control for no feature (Chrome still relies on cloud services for most AI features).
I don't even know what you're getting at here. You claim my comment, which points out how disingenuous the article is, is whataboutism, then provide some whataboutism.
Article talk about pushing a large model on people's computer. You minimize this by going about McDonalds, Shell, BP. Do you even know what "whataboutism" mean? Your first sentence is "what about McDonald, Shell, BP".
Pointing out the huge environmental cost and relative uselessness of shiny word predictors is not pushing nonsense.
Claiming a tiny environmental impact is huge in order to push an agenda is bullshit and you know it
Sticking your head in the sand and pretending everyone has an agenda is bullshit and you know it.
Right back at ya! Calling out bullshit agendas is not bullshit and you, know it
Ok dude. Enjoy
Fuck off
I think we found the google engineer.
Why? Because I'm not keen on lies and bullshit? I don't work for google
Are they hating, or are they pointing out that companies that claim to be honestly working towards a "greener" end are adding unwanted and unnecessary code to users computers against their will. Code, BTW, that can not be removed permanently and adds not only the cost of the bandwidth of the download used, but also the general cost of the cloud-backed nature of it's functioning to the mix. As someone that doesn't use Chrome or the cloud, I'd be furious.. The Keystone Agent (a perniciously rotten bit of code that eats clock cycles in one's system and runs constantly in the background) that chrome updates with - it's exactly why I quit the browser years ago.
Nuts to that.
Chrome sucks, sure. Did you have a coherent point beyond that? No, didn't think so.
You asked.. I answered.
Dunno why you're so butthurt over the fact that beyond the environmental claims, the issue of code being deployed into someone's system without their permission or any ability to halt or prevent it means less to you than the former point.
Do you work for google? 'Cos damn dude, you're coming down on this like you do.
The environmental impact of AI is massively overblown all the fucking time and I don't like lies. And I do like AI