Anonymous #12 4w

ChatGPT is literally run by a multibillion dollar company but ok

123

Anonymous #11 4w

because it uses water to cool their servers & lots of energy.. which every app does.. ppl see one thing and run with it instead of looking at the bigger picture. rlly no way to be ethical unless you just dont use your phone at all.

50

Anonymous #16 4w

What insulin pump do you use

2

Anonymous #8 4w

Tandem with control IQ

10

Anonymous #11 4w

It requires a lot more energy to run an AI query than a Google search + the energy required to train the AI. There’s energy consumption included in running the calculations, but running the calculations also creates a lot of heat. Data centers have to be constantly cooled or else they’ll overheat and fail.

33

Anonymous navy_dodo75 4w

I mean, you say that but I fear you don’t really know what a megawatt looks like. There’s five new AI data centers coming to my city that each have higher energy consumption than the Empire State Building. AI definitely isn’t the only thing that the average person is abusing and causing environmental detriment, but it also shouldn’t be discounted.

23

Anonymous navy_dodo75 4w

people go out of their way to use chat gpt when they could just google. yea it’s probably impossible to avoid all ai unless you deleted every social media app ever, but chat gpt is useless. this mindset is harmful

17

Anonymous #13 4w

In terms of a list of every single multibillion or even trillion dollar company, chatGPT is not really up there. Their emissions def do not HELP global warming but there are bigger fish to fry

-5

I understand their emissions def contribute, but global warming was a thing before chatGPT, I’m just confused as to why I’m suddently seeing 6 yikyak posts saying chatGPT is why the temp is 80 in October when temperature has been rapidly increasing since the 2000s

-8

Anonymous #18 4w

thats fair, but data centers power almost everything online, not just ai lol. + a lot of new ai centers are being built to run on renewable energy.. i would look into that! theyre definitely making steps in the right direction. im in no way supporting ai, but i dont think it’s fair to run a hate train on one platform when every big tech company contributes to that same issue! 😄

8

Anyone with a brain who studies environmental science/meteorology/geology and actually pays attention would recognize the dangers of our current AI usage levels

158

Anonymous #19 4w

so do ALL digital platforms. it isnt a harmful mindset at all, it's literally acknowledging that everything online has an environmental cost. chatgpt can actually REDUCE total resource use because it gives direct answers instead of people opening 20 different tabs. take that how you want 😄

0

Anonymous navy_dodo75 4w

you still have to double & triple check chatGPT bc it’s known for citing sources that don’t even exist. if i have to look up all the sources on my own to make sure they’re real anyway, i might as well do my own research at that point. info literacy is dying, in no small part due to chatGPT

8

It kind of is that simple, though? Having AI do your homework for you just means you’ll be fucked when you enter the real world. And it teaches you nothing. When you use AI and your peers aren’t, they’re getting valuable skills like problem solving and creativity that you’re missing out on. Not to mention its environmental impacts. AI seems like a great short term solution to a lot of students. But it’s all smoke and mirrors.

77

I’ve gotten told by people to do injections to save the planet…

3

Anonymous #16 4w

Fuck people your pancreas needs you girl

3

Anonymous #12 4w

You’re right, it’s been an issue for longer than ChatGPT. We should all be doing everything we can to mitigate climate change. That includes everything from turning off lights to carpooling, to eating less meat, to using less AI.

51

Anonymous #22 4w

And a serial killer is worse than someone who only murders one person

6

Anonymous #13 4w

i dont believe that i ever said that chatgpt is 100% accurate? im saying that everything that we do online has an enviromental footprint.. chatgpt is just a tool.. how people use the tool affects their info literacy, not the tool itself. if people do not want to put in adequate research, that’s on them. it CAN be helpful if used correctly. also, i dont understand the point in bringing up ‘triple checking’ its information when that should be a standard practice regardless of the tool you use. 😄

1

Anonymous #23 4w

What is your point? Because your rebuttal is pretty much bolstering my point if anything.

8

Anonymous #26 4w

And the leading cause of death in birds isn’t even from renewable energy, it’s from collisions with windows and buildings, habitat loss, and also cats 😭

5

Anonymous #24 4w

We’re talking about the disproportionately high carbon emissions associated with AI girl

11

Anonymous #22 4w

Both murderers should still be in prison…my point is that both ai and ag are bad and we should care about BOTH

13

Anonymous navy_dodo75 4w

I wasn’t talking about checking the info itself, that should be done regardless. but chat is literally known for “hallucinations” as in MADE UP sources that, if you try to look them up, do not even exist for you to verify

1

Anonymous #13 4w

I can’t check a source for accuracy when the source itself isn’t real!!

1

Anonymous #28 4w

I got downvoted bc I told the truth🤣🤣

4

Anonymous #23 4w

Yes, yet nobody talks abt animal agriculture, not as much as AI gets talked about. Somehow criticizing animal agriculture is far more controversial than criticizing AI, when animal agriculture is objectively far worse for the environment. The majority of the population still financially supports animal agriculture every day too.

2

Anonymous #22 4w

animal and crop agriculture contribute roughly equally to ghg emissions

6

Anonymous #13 4w

Animal agriculture also includes crop farming for the animals so animal agriculture is still worse.

2

Anonymous #18 4w

AI and data centers aren’t known for their high carbon output, they’re known for their high water and electrical usage. Over a century of gas powered engines has done far more damage than AI

8

Anonymous #28 4w

The main point is that you could just not use AI to do the easiest stuff that requires like 0.1% of your brain power. Js because other diabolical companies are doing worse stuff doesn’t mean you should add on to the problems cuz it’s “not that bad” comparatively.

4

Anonymous #22 4w

One is needed the other isn’t

5

Anonymous #7 4w

Both arent needed. We arent obligate carnivores, hence why we can live on plant based diets. If we actually needed to consume animal products it would be a different story, but thankfully we dont.

7

Anonymous #30 4w

Read the main post again🤦🏼‍♂️ The main point was that ChatGPT was making global warming worse. Compared to most companies out there, it’s not even a player in the board.

1

Anonymous #22 4w

No, millions cannot actually medically switch to a plant based diet. I for one would literally die without meat

5

Anonymous #22 4w

Fun fact, cows need water to produce milk. Even more of a fun fact, there isn’t any milk that you can buy at the store that isn’t watered down. Even nut milk, oat milk, coconut milk (which is really just water as is), and literally every kind of milk is at least %50 water.

1

Anonymous #22 4w

We do need to consume animal products? There is an essential protein needed for homeostasis called Carnosine. No one ever wants to talk about it. It is required for human survival and it’s the main reason why a lot of vegans and vegetarian need to take a ton of supplements to still get all the nutrients they need. It’s only found in muscle tissue and organs. You cannot get it from a plant-based product. If you really don’t believe, look it up.

5

Anonymous #28 4w

Also, for all you that might take it, Carnosine supplements are made form animal products! 😃😃

1

Anonymous #7 4w

Where is your source for that statistic? How would you literally die without meat?

-2

No, but like i said animal agriculture also includes the crops that are grown to feed the animals. So without animal agriculture, we would reduce crop runoffs drastically bc we wouldnt need as many crops

-3

Anonymous #22 4w

You wouldn’t die, but you wouldn’t be healthy either.

0

Anonymous #28 4w

Your body can naturally produce carnosine, with the right amino acids

-1

Anonymous #28 4w

Vegans are scientifically proven to be healthier than omnivores

-2

Anonymous #22 4w

It only produces the bare necessity to keep your brain alive. It doesn’t produce the required amount to keep you healthy.

1

Anonymous #28 4w

Weird bc ive been vegan for 11 years and im healthier than most nonvegans, and so are many other vegans. Why do you guys always focus on the tiniest, most unimportant micronutrient to focus on? The end line is that you can live just fine on a plant based diet. Focus on people who are ACTUALLY unhealthy, which is the majority of the population bc they eat standard american diet consisting of fast foods and processed meats, being overweight, having heart and colon issues

0

Anonymous #28 4w

Just do some basic research. Google is free bud

-1

Anonymous #28 4w

Also you can supplement with beta-alanine to produce carnosine

0

Anonymous #22 4w

1) Carnosine isn’t an unimportant micronutrient. It’s required to maintain homeostasis which if you’ve had an anatomy lesson, is the bodies regulating process. 2) beta-alanine is derived from animal products or aspartate. I looked for a while and couldn’t find and aspartate beta alanine supplements. All of them were made from animal proteins. 3) I never once said processed meats aren’t a problem. I avoid processed meats and I’m perfectly healthy.

5

Anonymous #22 4w

The best diet anyone can have is moderation and self control. If you don’t have either of those, you’ll never be healthy.

8

Anonymous #22 4w

People need food to eat, people don't need ai to make grocery lists. The point of this is that collectively people have such a disregard for the very real and fast approaching threat of climate change.

1

Anonymous #26 4w

Newsflash: animal products arent our only food source 🤯 And yes people shouldnt use ai for stupid shit. Why do you guys think its one or the other?

0

Prove me wrong. Where are your sources?

0

Anonymous #28 4w

That still doesnt matter because you can produce it yourself, just like how you synthesize vitamin D in your body

-1

Anonymous #22 4w

Did you not read what I said earlier? Your body does not produce enough to keep you healthy, just alive. Same with vitamin D, which is why things like season allergies and seasonal depression exist. Both have been linked to a vitamin D deficiency in the winter due to a lack of sunlight which is how your body gets the most vitamin D. You are using logical fallacies to try to prove your argument.

0

Anonymous #24 4w

Do you know how we generate electricity

1

Anonymous #18 4w

A combination of clean energy and fossil fuels. Regardless, the carbon emission output connected to AI is far less than that of gas vehicles

1

Anonymous #28 4w

It can produce enough if you eat enough of the needed amino acids, and like i said u can supplement with beta alanine if you truly are worried

1

Anonymous #28 4w

What logical fallacies? I never said you can produce vitamin d without sunlight? Obviously you need sunlight, sorry i thought everyone already knew that

1

Anonymous #28 4w

“While not a dietary deficiency, this carnosine reduction can impact muscle fatigue and athletic performance, which can be addressed by supplementing with beta-alanine, a vegan-friendly precursor.” Aka it isnt health threatening, it’s only a minor nitpick, and only really applicable for those who wish to grow muscle more effectively. Show me proof that it is absolutely essential for life/health. You cant. Lmfao

1

Anonymous #28 4w

That meant to be a reply to #22

0

Anonymous #22 4w

I did, go look at the very last comment on the post. I forgot to click reply🤦🏼‍♂️

1

Anonymous #28 4w

Its not the only thing used for that though is it. There are vegan beta alanine supplements lol, its just synthetic.

1

Anonymous #28 4w

Literally just look up vegan beta alanine supplements. Also you still failed to prove that it is crucial to health to consume it from animal sources. Take the L

1

Anonymous #22 4w

Take the L? Are we in middle school? I never said those were the only uses for carnosine, in fact I have been saying there are many uses for it, which is why it is essential for keeping a healthy body (especially in old age). Even after giving many examples of how it keeps your body healthy, I still haven’t proven it? How about this one? It’s the key component in muscle tissue and without it or a deficiency in it will lead to muscle fatigue and failure.

1

Anonymous #22 4w

Supplements exist somewhere but that doesn’t mean it’s an improvement on the original source. Powered milk is an alternative to liquid milk, that doesn’t make it better. The original source still has more nutrients than some supplement. On top of that, a human shouldn’t have to talk a ton of vitamins and supplements to stay healthy and get the nutrients they need. Vegans and vegetarians have to.

3

Anonymous #22 4w

Also hey, let’s bring in some more vital nutrients and vitamins for a healthy body that can’t be gotten in vegan diet without supplements. Omega-3, Vitamin B12, Iodine, and very low amounts of Vitamin D.

5

Anonymous #32 3w

Really? Well this certainly is news, could you tell me how you got to such a conclusion?

1

Anonymous #32 3w

Global warming is real, it’s just not what everyone thinks it is. The earth has a natural heating and cooling cycle that lasts about 10,000 years. The last ice age was around 10,000 years ago. We have been coming out of an ice age since. We will be going back into a heating cycle for the next 10,000 years. It’s the same reason the average temperature on earth was around 100 degrees while dinosaurs were alive. The majority of global warming is natural.

1

Anonymous #28 3w

That doesn’t mean however, that humans haven’t contributed to global warming. The hole in the ozone layer has been there for about a thousand years but only in the past hundred has it doubled in size. The amount of greenhouse gases that we produce as humans does contribute to it.

1

Anonymous #28 3w

The exponential growth we've seen in heat, but also climate instability is not precedented. And we know directly what's causing it. If you'd like to dm or talk here i can direct you to resources that help look into this further.

1

Anonymous #26 3w

This is all just rhetoric, I’m not disagreeing here. We have no exact proof but there are many scientific research backed theories that suggest the world had very similar climate instability 20,000BC to 10,000BC which is the last time the earth had a heating cycle like this. Not to mention, the earth has been getting closer and closer to the sun. We have real data showing how that’s affected the climate. There’s theories suggesting we will leave the Goldilocks zone before the sun goes supernova.

0

Anonymous #28 3w

It's not rhetoric, it's genuinely backed by leading climate scientists, in this page from NASA you can see it literally says "The current warming trend is different because it is clearly the result of human activities … and is proceeding at a rate not seen over many recent millennia" and then it cites studies along with it. https://science.nasa.gov/climate-change/evidence

1

Anonymous #28 3w

Another thing to consider is 1) who's saying anything contrary to the consensus and who's funding them 2) is the temperature being brought up from an era before complex life evolved 3) the age of statistics being brought up. There's a lot of money being spent to push out contrary narratives because oil has a huge hand in what news gets out about climate change. It's a lot like bug tobacco in the 70s.

1

Anonymous #28 3w

I'd really recommend watching: https://youtu.be/C-gdabZooKo?si=dfOu5CWMOTxPVCME for a digestible video on common misconceptions about climate change

1

Anonymous #26 3w

When talking about the climate from thousands of years ago, it is rhetoric. There is no definitive proof, only theories and suggestions. Also, big oil funds NASA as well. Their studies will be just as fabricated. As I said, yes humans have helped make climate change worse. However, WE DID NOT CUASE IT. That’s all I’m saying.

0

Anonymous #28 3w

You’re right, there is a natural cooling and heating in the world, however it is scientific fact that what’s happening right now, is not natural. Humans are speeding it up by such a rate that has never been recorded. And there is definitive proof of previous climates, so you clearly don’t know what you’re talking about. It’s a massive part of geology, you can tell the climate of the passed based on the chemical composition of rocks from that time

1

Anonymous #28 3w

We by scientific fact, have caused global warming. We are the problem and we are making it worse at such an exponential rate that now we need to worry about it

1

Anonymous #28 3w

And the Earth is not getting closer to the sun 😂 that makes no fucking sense and proves once again that you don’t know shit

1

Anonymous #7 3w

If anything, the Earth is moving AWAY from the sun. If that

1

Anonymous #28 3w

We dont cause natural heating fluctuations, but what we're going through isn't natural. It's unprecedented and looking through studies as I've suggested will show this to be the case. I plead that you look at credible sources from non partisan writers.

2

Anonymous #26 3w

I said human do account for a lot of what is happening today. However, the earth DOES have natural heating and cooling cycles. THATS WHY WE HAVE ICE AGES. There have been multiple throughout the planets history that haven’t been due to humans but rather the planets natural cycle due to it’s rotation and orbit around the sun.

0

Anonymous #28 3w

Again, it's a few degrees discrepancy, and the rate of change is what's concerning. Also the rate is destabilizing the climate not just making it hot. That means areas get more rain, more snow, more tsunamis, hurricanes. What's going on is concerning and is already going beyond the natural rate of change. I implore you to read into this and understand why people are concerned.

5

Anonymous #26 3w

Few degrees discrepancy? We have evidence showing temperatures to be much, much hotter thousands of years ago than they are today. During the Cretaceous period, the polar ice caps didn’t even exist. Those a remnants from the last ice age. The Eemian Interglacial period (the one right before the last ice age) WAS HOTTER THAN IT IS TODAY.

1

Anonymous #26 3w

We have evidence from the Eemian era (coral fossils, sediment records, ice core samples) that prove the ice caps were significantly smaller than they are today, with many theories suggesting ice free summers in the Arctic. On top of that, ocean temperatures were around 10-20 degrees (Celsius) warmer than today’s average.

1

Anonymous #28 3w

The cretaceous period was 145.5 million years ago - 66 million years ago. Do you know what time of life was around 66 million years ago? Not thousands. And again it's the RATE of change. Cretaceous period climate change was over a span of Millions of years, ours has been under 300. You're blatantly wrong on this and you still are ignoring the rate of warming since 1982 is more than three times as fast: 0.36° F (0.20° C) per decade.

1

Anonymous #26 3w

The very FIRST key takeaway from the NASA website you sent is as follows: “While Earth’s climate has changed throughout its history, the current warming is happening at a rate not seen in the past 10,000 years.” A rate not seen in the past 10,000 years… Hmmm isn’t that what I’ve been saying?

1

Anonymous #28 3w

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-temperature#:~:text=Highlights.%20Earth's%20temperature%20has%20risen%20by%20an,fast:%200.36%C2%B0%20F%20(0.20%C2%B0%20C)%20per%20decade.

1

Anonymous #28 3w

Okay so here's what was happening in the Ice Age that caused this the earth heated at a natural rate then greenhouse gases are released CO₂ and CH₄ (carbon dioxide and methane) that were trapped in Glacial ice frozen soils and deep ocean sand or whatever begin to escape into the atmosphere. Oceans also release CO₂ as they warm. Creating a positive feedback loop. This event significantly changed the earth's environment, but wasn't catestrophic since it just got out of a huge freezing event.

1

Anonymous #26 3w

What we're seeing will change the Earth's environment drastically but this time we won't have a huge freezing event to build off of which will cause sea levels to rise etc etc

1

Anonymous #26 3w

You seem to have missed something I said earlier. I am not disagreeing that the rate of change is an issue in the modern age. I am not disagreeing that humans are the direct cause of that. What I am saying is that the root cause of global warming and climate change is not human. You are trying to twist my argument when I have been agreeing with you the entire time. I was simply trying to prove my point that global warming is ALSO a natural phenomenon.

1

Anonymous #28 3w

I see and if so I apologize. But to be clear the last change of 5 C° in the Ice Age took roughly 8,000 years we have seen a change of 1.2 C° within 150 years. This is definitely something unnatural and man caused due to Carbon emissions.

1

Anonymous #26 3w

I won’t deny that, the number don’t lie. However I will say, the majority of that change happened from 1800-2000. While we don’t have documented evidence from the 1800s the industrial age released greenhouse gases at a rate we have seen in the modern age. They were also using much more toxic chemicals and pollutants. By 1987, any gas that deteriorates Ozone was banned worldwide. Scientists estimate the hole will reach pre-1800 levels by 2060-2075 (ozone takes awhile to replicate)

1