Anonymous #4 4w

And also we should not be having as much dairy/beef

33

Anonymous #4 4w

Yea but it’s like saying at least hunting nearly extinct animal species is feeding people as an excuse for hunting nearly extinct animal species, when you could just like, not? Because animal products are not necessary, and are extremely resource intensive (unsustainable af) and harm the environment in more ways than one.

-6

Anonymous #1 4w

Dairy farms also pollute our freshwater

-3

Anonymous OP 4w

As does AI. What’s your point?

36

Anonymous #7 4w

Oh i didnt know that, still that is indirectly whereas animal agriculture is directly polluting freshwater with waste, and at higher rates than ai. Im not arguing that ai is not an issue. Im just begging yall to understand that if you care abt the environment to please care and acknowledge the harms that animal agriculture causes to the environment also, as it is far worse.

-1

Anonymous #5 4w

Nobody is arguing for the use of AI? Two things can be bad at once. Just pointing out the hypocrisy of caring for the environment yet completely ignoring the fact that animal agriculture is far worse for the environment

2

Anonymous OP 4w

damn ppl downvoting bc they don’t wanna accept that animal products are not necessities? 💀💀 what the hell yall

13

Anonymous #7 4w

all u get from animal products is a higher likelihood of getting cancer

1

Anonymous #6 4w

between about 57,000 and 1.7 million queries (0.32-10 mL water per query) would use the same amount of water as 1 gallon of milk (~150 gallons water per gallon of milk)

6

Anonymous #6 4w

Queries aren’t expensive, it’s the training that is. They haven’t released the data ab how expensive training is but we do know it’s off by orders of magnitude

5

Anonymous #3 4w

Don’t tell me a query isn’t expensive when it’s still FIFTEEN FUCKING TIMES that of a Google search

3

Anonymous #8 3w

We literally wouldn’t have even evolved to this point without eating meat. Animal products are the difference between life and death for hundreds of millions of people around the world, especially in climates where it’s too hot or cold to grow many crops effectively

-2

Anonymous #7 3w

And AI will also assist us with survival. Your point?

-2

Anonymous #6 3w

Ain’t no fucking way you’re saying AI will help us survive in the same way food will 💀💀💀

-1

Anonymous #7 3w

It may help us solve problems for cancer, heart disease, and other medical breakthroughs. I guess we’ll see what happens.

1

Anonymous #3 3w

Not more than animal agriculture still. You carnists love to pick and choose what to worry about. “Oh i only care about the environment until it means i have to make changes to my lifestyle, then i will fight tooth and nail to defend those evil practices bc i dont wanna change!”

1

Anonymous #7 3w

Animals and animal products aren’t the only food available for the majority of the population.

6

Anonymous #9 3w

I am against ai, more than one thing can be a problem at once, but animal agriculture is a disproportionately worse problem than ai is, but nobody wants to acknowledge or accept it because then it make you feel guilty. Its all cognitive dissonance. So instead you focus on things that dont require you to actually self reflect on your own lifestyle and actions to feel better about yourself.

1

Anonymous OP 3w

Which is crazy because you could just easily go vegan and bam be instantly consistent within your beliefs, but you carnists are all treatlerites. If ai produced delicious meals, you all would be defending it, or at least not criticizing it bc yummy ai food

1

Anonymous #9 3w

Also nobody is minimizing the impact, but compared to animal agriculture it obviously is not as big of a contributor to negative environmental impacts.

1

Anonymous #9 3w

Ok idk what’s going on it won’t let me reply to you. Continued: I think it will show that gen AI is not this minuscule problem compared to meat. I acknowledge our meat consumption is unsustainable. I am saying that gen AI is much more comparable than this graph suggests.

1

Anonymous #9 3w

Okay well this isnt a “only focus on one thing” argument. Its arguing that you hypocrites should actually live consistently in your beliefs. You criticize ai use for its environmental harms, so i assume you dont use ai obviously. So what about animal agriculture then? Because one nonvegan that doesnt use AI harms the environment far more than one vegan who doesnt use use ai. Its a much bigger impact to not consume animals products, than to not use ai.

2

Anonymous OP 3w

My reasons to not use AI go way, way beyond the environment. I am a generative AI hater moreso for how it allows you to procrastinate developing your critical thinking skills, and just not think. Secondly, based on this data, it really isn’t conclusive how chat gpt compares per capita to eating meat/dairy. Especially if we’re talking about the context of what we can do as individuals. And yes, I am a hypocrite. To make sustainable lifestyle changes, sometimes that takes time.

1

Anonymous #9 3w

On being a hypocrite: we all are. Do you like slavery? Guess how the lithium or cobalt in your phone or computer got there. “You need a phone!” Well, you don’t. You could theoretically go the rest of your life without buying electronics. You might depend though, on others using them. And believe me, I’m on board with transitioning away from such a meat centric life style. I do think we need to celebrate steps towards progress, or we will risk alienating people further.

2

Anonymous #9 3w

Wow youre so right, we should just keep enslaving and torturing animals needlessly then! Headass. Also the key difference is that practices can be changed to be more ethical for phone production, however animal agriculture is inherently unethical. No systemic reform can be done to change that fact.

6

Anonymous #7 3w

a google search or a query are nothing compared to the animal products you eat every day 🙂

3

Anonymous #7 3w

a lot of early human civilization relied heavily or completely on a plant based diet buddy

7