• Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    13 days ago

    You sound very angry and defensive. And you will continue to do so after evidence shows that AI has had a negative impact on the environment. On the bright side, the end of humanity will mean that people being angry and defensive won’t exist either, which will be nice.

    • thetreesaysbark@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 days ago

      The environmental impact is interesting, if an AI search being as environmentally impactful as 10 Google searches is true.

      I don’t know about you, but it often takes a number of Google searches for me to find the right information, whereas with AI and Google combined I usually get the info I need in 1/2 Google searches.

      That means that, based on my personal experience, AI is probably more environmentally efficient at getting me the correct info than google search alone.

      Edit: gotta love downvoters that give no discussion. I’m happy to re-evaluate the above but if nobody is rebuking it then all I can assume is that downvoters are ‘AI BAD’ folks who don’t have any intelligent input.

      • Oni_eyes@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 days ago

        The ai results from Google I have been getting are less helpful than two specific searches. It could be because of how we search for things and it is definitely getting messed with because of seo weighting and ai targeting those tools, so I think a better option would be to teach people how to actually use the search engines properly instead of just sitting back and letting ais pick up slack.

        • thetreesaysbark@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 days ago

          My scenario is that I use chatgpt to get context and terminology in the area I’m researching.

          I then know how to do more specific Google searches (only 1/2).

            • thetreesaysbark@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 days ago

              I guess it adds up to 12 searches worth of environmental impact with chatgpt+Google (10 searches worth from chatgpt, 2 from Google)

              When I use Google alone it’s often the same as that if not more. Sometimes it’s less if I already know the subject matter, but in those scenarios I would usually give just Google a go first anyway.

              Basically chatgpt often either gives me the answer or a much better starting place for what to Google.

              • Oni_eyes@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 days ago

                I don’t understand the chatgpt bit still. When you say you need more context on the subject matter, you could search for the wiki or a forum and get the same information chatgpt is pulling without the impact.

                • thetreesaysbark@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  9 days ago

                  you could search for the wiki or a forum and get the same information chatgpt is pulling without the impact.

                  True, depending on the quality of the wiki/forum. I would then also often find myself defaulting back to Google to find the right page on the wiki/forum, just with the name of the forum included to narrow down my search.

                  That or I’d never find the exact bit of info I need because it’s buried in hours worth of reading on the wiki.