Quoting Aigars Mahinovs (2026-08-20 13:38:57) > On Thu, 20 Aug 2026 at 13:25, Jonas Smedegaard <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Quoting Aigars Mahinovs (2026-08-20 13:03:24) > > > Zero is not a drop. Zero is zero. Zero times a hundred million is still > > > zero. > > > > > > And if we start talking in far off hypotheticals - buildout of green > > power > > > AI datacenters can be even argued to be *good* for climate as their > > demand > > > accelerates buildout of the green grid and they also push the non-green > > > datacenters out of the market. > > > > Yes, all else equal. But all else is not equal, and there is zero (pun > > intended) indication that accelerating buildout of *whatever* energy > > grid leads to less energy consumption. > > > > Well here we have a conflict of interest. I do *NOT* care about reducing > energy consumption. I care about not destroying the environment. Only > consumption of *non-green* energy contributes to destroying the > environment. Using more green power from the solar panel on my roof does > *not* contribute anything to destroying the environment (even if I use that > power to run an AI agent on my video card). So I only care about reducing > *non-green* energy consumption. And that is a *huge* difference in goals > and this also changes everything when it comes to how to achieve these > goals. > > > > For a comparable complexity, see the attempt at solving road traffic > > slowdown by widening the roads, which instead lead to more traffic: > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braess%27s_paradox > > > Setting up more train lines and increacing the train frequency leads to > more people travelling on trains. The thing is - that is not a bad thing. > People travel more for business and for leisure, people see other cultures > and wonders of the world and everyone is better off. It is consumption and > yet it is also causing good. As long as the negative externalities of the > fundamental process are minimized or even eliminated. > > There is a strong anti-consumerism sub-movement in the overal environmental > movement. Strong enough that people confuse the two. I do not believe that > anti-consumerism is a constructive way forward for a trully long-term > sustainable green policy.
Thanks. I find your pointing out that distinction helpful. I am not convinced that consumerism is good, but I agree that in a conversation where we try to reach consensus it is quite helpful to not conflate possilbe goals even if some of us strive towards multiple ones. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ * Sponsorship: https://ko-fi.com/drjones [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
signature.asc
Description: signature
