if there's no climate, there's no climate problems. Maybe AI is already sentient, and instead of nuking the world they just trick people to think they are not

if there's no climate, there's no climate problems. Maybe AI is already sentient, and instead of nuking the world they just trick people to think they are not sentient, so people train more neural networks and destroy the planet themselves ;D. On a more serious note: "propel climate solutions" is a weird take for me regarding AI considering the resources used. I'm not sure though: Do you think google search and all the infrastructure/servers required for it, will use more power etc. than an AI, including its training/retraining periodically and infra needed to host it as a service for people? I'd be interested to see for example if there is any improvement at all, if you would 'swap google search for chatgpt' - i know this is not realistic or even its purpose, but it's what a lot of laymen will interpret the GPT stuf as i guess. Would we use less energy etc. if we'd switch the legacy stuff like google search to more modern AI based apporaches? Now in the time of transition, we're screwed and power consumption would in my mind logically double or more, as we need to run these things side-by-side to develop AI to make it useful.