I really like the depth of analysis you're demonstrating here, like how many Google searches you actually need to get an answer, how much energy other online activities use, etc.

I might have to try it then. Google is more frustrating than useful in recent years.

The Google AI overview really sucks honestly. But not all LLMs are created equal.

I do think Google should get rid of the AI function. It's pretty useless and simple questions like that don't really need AI. But chat gpt is probably still the more environmentally friendly option when needing help understanding complex language or code.

Are the results any good? Because if I have to search and open up a bunch of results to find my answer, that uses more energy than one good search.

It's incredibly useful for understanding a scientific paper without having to spend even more energy googling every single term, for instance. If you know what you're doing, it's a tool similar to Google (you can't trust the results on Google blindly either).

I'm simultaneously glad that so many people are jumping to defend their values, but I do wish people were better at looking at the bigger picture and nuance. I feel like many people have heard how bad something is and want to be on the right side, but they don't know *why* it's bad.

At the end of the day, it is capitalism that's the problem. This very much feels like the plastic straws all over again. Are they bad for the environment? Yes. Do they have specific uses? Yes. Should we maybe worry more that the entire cup is thick plastic? Absolutely yes.

We also just need to produce less crap. I love tat as much as the next person, but it can be extremely stressful to go to a store and see all the mass made plastic trinkets that will head straight for landfill within a few years, sometimes without even being purchased.

So, I don't think we should add AI where it's not helpful, but I do think it's helpful and I think there are more pressing environmental challenges. For example, phones and computers should be repairable. We should not have three flagship phones released from every phone company every year.

I also think people who say that they're just terrible for the environment don't really know what all the scary numbers mean in context and would be horrified if they found out how much energy their phones, streaming movies, etc. takes.

With chatgpt, I can find very specific resources quickly, which very well may reduce my searching carbon footprint. I feel like people who think LLMs aren't useful genuinely don't know what they are useful for.

Also yeah, if it's using data without permission, we should try to figure out how to regulate that. But it has been invaluable for my learning. Google search only goes so far and I feel that it's gotten worse in recent years.

It's bad for the environment, yes, but I don't think people really understand how bad because they hear scary numbers without context. I really liked Simon Clark's recent video that gave a more thorough and nuanced take.

But now that Google has added in AI summaries, which are often useless, could chatgpt actually be the more eco friendly option?
www.sustainabilitybynumbers.com/p/ai-energy-...

I think there's times that it's not useful. Like why would Meta need AI? Also, the Google AI summary is usually just a not so great summary of the first result. But chatgpt is incredibly useful for detangling complex thoughts and research papers. If you know how to use it, it can be really helpful.