[jraph]

I'm not judging, I'm telling you (a bit snarkily, true) that your brain activity won't stop with something else doing (a part of) your work. And this is the subtility that makes the statement true. Said overwise: sure, you consume marginally less at rest, but you won't be at rest, making the remark pointless.

Even if it were false, the difference in energy consumption is not significant, taking on acount what the AI uses, and also all the energy that you use to live (housing, heating, products and food you buy whose production uses energy, etc).

And about the water, it's even worse, even disregarding the AI: at rest, maybe you'll drink, I don't know, 1L less (that's a wild number!), compared to the 100(s) L that you use to cook, wash, clean, etc, not even counting the water used to produce stuff you buy.

But again, you won't do nothing. We are commenting on a post of a guy who was fired and couldn't help creating something. That's how we are. We hate boredom.

Worse: the way our societies are setup makes is so that ai, if it helps at all, likely won't free us from work, it will likely just make us collectively produce more garbage. That's more energy consumption, not less.

That "but don't forget humans consume a lot of energy too" argument is at best not connects to reality, more likely a Sam Altman lie and you shouldn't take it seriously.