Stopped reading when you seemed to imply either there's some widely accepted cultural rule that it's OK to gaslight someone and lie to them as long as you disagree with them, or the people I accused of lying and gaslighting didn't actually do it, but merely disagreed with me and did nothing else

yuri: "ITT: OP calls everyone who thinks he should use the checkbox “liars”"

iloveDigit: "You might wanna learn to read, what they said wasn't "calling people liars""

Okay...

Copying and pasting without reading doesn't achieve the same goal as reading

Why do you fell pressured using it ?

If you have good ressource on ecological side of AI and rare earth, i'm interested because i don't have lot informations. Most of the tell us that they are building nuclear reactor. You may want create a post and invite use to raise our knowledge on these topics.

Most of my knowledge come from the ADEME (french ecological structure that analyse various situation), and they did predict metal ressource depletion around 2050.

More exactly, digging machine will have a lower mining rate for a given ressource. We will have to remove lot more earth to find iron, copper... it's the same problem for oil.

And for the misuse of AI, that's the scale of it that worry my the most : governement and big tech. Especially big tech, i'm fearfull of them. I would prefer a collective solution : made by people, for people and respecting human diversity and right.

I haven't given example of OpenAI but Microsoft is one of its main investor. They were at Trump meeting with other american big tech. So my trust that was already low dropped to the bottom. 😅

People have indicated they'll take it as validation of some cultish toxic mindset that seems to be forming

The USGS is my go-to source for mineral reserves. Their website is becoming harder to navigate by the year, here is a directory with their reports on several minerals: https://pubs.usgs.gov/periodicals/mcs2025/ And also here is a mandatory reading on the various definition of 'reserves' that they use. The misconceptions usually come from there.

If you have good ressource on ecological side of AI and rare earth, i’m interested

I am too. Because I always see the claim, "there is a rare earth problem with AI" but every time I ask for specifics, I get nothing. I have had to defend against the claims of depletion of copper, lithium, uranium, gallium, in the past, I am ready to defend whatever they now claim is going to miss but it always remains vague.

Rare earth are strategical and of interest to states but not because of mineral availability reasons, because of capitalist incentive reasons. What people do not realize is that the actual problem is that these minerals are actually very cheap, yet hard to extract! They are usually the byproducts of other mining (IIRC gallium is a side product of some aluminium deposits) and are absolutely not profitable to mine solely by themselves. Yet, if you don't have access to a source, no microchips (for gallium) or efficient electric engine/turbines (for neodymium) for you!

So there is an incentive to have access to mines, but the precious part is the actual mine with its investment done and its working business, not the geological resource.

You may want create a post and invite use to raise our knowledge on these topics.

I am a bit tired of defending it online but maybe I should indeed. I have tried to make some posts on solarpunk@slrpnk.net in the past, but the hostility is draining. I feel I should spend more time helping the OSS scene rather than addressing vocal critics online that may actually be a small minority.

Most of my knowledge come from the ADEME (french ecological structure that analyse various situation), and they did predict metal ressource depletion around 2050.

ADEME is usually a good source. I am surprised they would make such a claim. Do you have a link?

We will have to remove lot more earth to find iron, copper… it’s the same problem for oil.

Not really. Oil and in more general fossil resources are special in that they come from an organic process that makes them available only on a thin layer of the crust and only where some precise geological conditions were met. Their scarcity is much more immediate than minerals which are basically available pretty homogeneously once you start digging.

Minerals do get a bit harder to get but oil becomes impossible to get at one point. Like always, the key is to quantify the problem. A (imperfect) proxy to the difficulty to obtain minerals is market price. Minerals like coppers have seen their price rise quite a bit but rare earths like gallium have seen their price go down. None seem to have an unsustainable trend.

I would prefer a collective solution : made by people, for people and respecting human diversity and right.

Me too! That's why I try to fight the rejection of "AI" as a whole. This work is currently being done, open source is actually winning this important battle in the general indifference, and it really breaks my heart to see it thrown in the same bag as some genuinely evil people of the corporate AI world.

I haven’t given example of OpenAI but Microsoft is one of its main investor

Oh yes totally, I don't trust OpenAI one bit, it is just that I do have examples of propaganda training by DeepSeek and Grok and would have loved to know if some proofs exist for OpenAI (or Anthropic). I don't consider them ethical either even if they don't, they have many other problems.

But, sorry i think it doesn't answer my question :

why do you fell pressured using it ?

Sad that people use systems like this to be manipulative and I’m pressured out of using it myself

I may misunderstood but did you told me that you use AI because other people use it. Or were you talking about flaging AI content ?

"Systems" refers to "AI" or the "flag AI” ?

No, I felt pressured not to use the check box by others in this thread

Why so ? It is informing other that your meal has meat or not. :)

People have indicated they'll take it as confirming delusions, so I'm better off using exact words instead of the check box

Do as you want, some people will use the checkbox, other won't. Some will block people that post AI content without telling them or report it to the mod team. Some mod may flag AI content, i'm part of them, i will flag them if i can do so.

Personal opinion, i consider, given the current trend, we need to build a place where we can trust each other.

You may not be aware of the current state of server management. Lot AI bots were spotted or repported. There is 2 kinds of AI bots : crawlers and chat bot.

Crawler are uterlly destroying the server capacity : they take lot bandwidth so the speed our pages's load is affected. They also take lot memory ressource. A sysadmin shared his experience on how his hard drive were burnt by crawlers. He admitted he didn't put any defence system as Anubis.

And there is chat bot interacting with users. That's a more serious problem because of their influence : they may follow a political agenda. You don't know why it is here nor who use them. You may not spot them and interact with them. How would you fell if you spent hours interacting with a bot instead of a human ? Bad. Not happy. You will start being suspicious of anyone, everyone.

Being careful anytime is exhausting. Verifying is exhausting. But you can offer users a way to trust you and chose.

That's mostly the reason why this checkbox exist :

• because of AI content
• because we want a place were we can share our opinion and trust each other.

So it's not about you. It's about trust.