From the blog you quoted yourself:

Despite improving AI energy efficiency, total energy consumption is likely to increase because of the massive increase in usage. A large portion of the increase in energy consumption between 2024 to 2023 is attributed to AI-related servers. Their usage grew from 2 TWh in 2017 to 40 TWh in 2023. This is a big driver behind the projected scenarios for total US energy consumption, ranging from 325 to 580 TWh (6.7% to 12% of total electricity consumption) in the US by 2028.

(And likewise, the last graph of predictions for 2028)

From a quick read of that source, it is unclear to me if it factors in the electricity cost of training the models. It seems to me that it doesn’t.

I found more information here: https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/05/20/1116327/ai-energy-usage-climate-footprint-big-tech/

Racks of servers hum along for months, ingesting training data, crunching numbers, and performing computations. This is a time-consuming and expensive process—it’s estimated that training OpenAI’s GPT-4 took over $100 million and consumed 50 gigawatt-hours of energy, enough to power San Francisco for three days.

So, I’m not sure if those numbers for 2023 paint the full picture. And adoption of AI-powered tools was definitely not as high in 2023 as it is nowadays. So I wouldn’t be surprised if those numbers were much higher than the reported 22.7% of the total server power usage in the US.

Not even remotely close to this scale… At most you could compare the energy usage to the miners in the crypto craze, but I’m pretty sure that even that is just a tiny fraction of what’s going on right now.

It’s my belief that it’s rare for evolution to screw up.

That’s not how it works, I’m pretty sure… Mutations will have random effects and the species evolves based on characteristics being selected for based on better survivability, reproductive effectiveness, etc.

I would do everything I could to find an alternative solution and talk them down from it.

I’ve read your other messages and it seems that you’re thoroughly convinced that this wasn’t the case here. I suggest that you get a bit more context about this whole situation, as it has been a long path of trying multiple treatments and approaches, without any success. So it’s not even remotely close to what you suggest here. No Futurama suicide chambers here.

I’m pretty sure that this is not true. I’d love to see sources.

There was some research before the ongoing AI-panic, focusing on hentai instead. As it is as “harmless” as the AI-generated content.

And I do recall that at the time there were voices in research making the point that the consumption of material did not have correlation with actually reducing the urges. So this seems highly unlikely.

Wait, you’re not AI too?