this post was submitted on 13 Aug 2025
2 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

74024 readers
1851 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. 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.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Sorta like how corporations pushed recycling onto the public to deflect from their own culpability for pollution. Why would we regulate the companies building huge data centers when we can get average people to absorb the cost? It's not like they're making obscene profits while laying off untold thousands.

I mean, if that was the case, sure, let's have them pay to clean up the waste they generate. But have you seen NVIDIA, Microsoft, or Meta lately? These companies are barely staying in business. Their CEOs can hardly afford to ride the bus to work. Let's cut them a break.

TLDR: It's your fault the earth is dying because you horde emails.

top 10 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] mikenurre@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Power off the AI farms that no one wants anyway (except the oligarchs of course)

[–] CetaceanNeeded@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Nah, power off the oligarchs too

[–] thisbenzingring@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

triggering the server to delete your email is more energy than leaving it in storage (on a platter disk in some array in a raid)

the people who thought of that example are ignorant of how data centers work

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

the people who thought of that example are ignorant of how data centers work

Almost all politicians are ignorant about tech, yet we let them regulate it. In the worst ways. And fail to regulate it where it ought to be regulated.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Competent Politicians are well aware that they're not experts on everything and hence hire domain experts to help them understand those domains and actually make informed decisions about them.

Mind you, I suspect this specifically is more a side effect of the profound problems with Dishonesty and Cronyism that the UK has: basically they tackled drought as a negative perception of the Government problem, so set up a talk group to project the impression that the Government was doing something about it and chose as head of it (and to be well paid for it) somebody whose greatest qualification for it was being their mate, all of which is very typically in British power circles.

The natural consequence of such things is them producing fancy press releases which look absolutelly moronic for domain experts, but since most of the people who read such releases are not domain experts, that's usually fine and in fact advances the true purpose of that "group" (managing perceptions).

Even with the Tech Press internationally picking this up and making fun of it, since the very same people who play these power games over there also control the local Press, they might very well get away in Britain itself with a press release with even such a moronic idea as this, as it will be spinned to make them look good.

[–] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

OP hit the nail on the head. This is once again shifting the blame (and guilt) onto individuals who even collectively have fuck-all impact on the problem in question.

The worst of it is, some people will believe this shit.

[–] QuoVadisHomines@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

What’s even more infuriating is the numbers of people who fail to recognize that all of these companies sell these goods and services to consumers and it is those consumers who can reduce the demand.

[–] machiavellian@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

There was/is a demand for slavery. Should we wait for these people to realize that maybe owning slaves is not okay and morally wrong? Or should we just outright ban slavery and not give two fucks how "the market forces" view such action? You tell me.

[–] QuoVadisHomines@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That’s a false equivalence.

[–] machiavellian@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 days ago

Your argument is, correct me if I'm wrong, that the demand for product X always necessetates its production/supply and that supply will cease when there is no more demand.

A valid argument based on basic market economic principles.

I argue that there are times, when the demand for something does not outweigh the cost incurred (by the society) from the production and supply of a product. Meaning there are cases, such as this one, when it is almost impossible to decrease demand and thus influence the production which in turn would decrease the cost incurred by the society. In my view, the State has to protect foremost its citizenry, not ginormous enterprises. If this protection means going against "market forces", then so be it.

Both "products" cause harm to society while only a few benefit, so no, it was not a false equivalence.

But then again, I could be mistaken and feel free to correct me on anything. :))