Well we've been doing exactly this for 200 years! IMO the use of fossil fuels for manufacturing novelty products that go straight-to-landfill, and daily suburban commuting to bullshit jobs, and diverting water to inhabit cities in inhospitable deserts, is a greater cause of our 'slow genocide' than AI will be. So why would we stop now, when we couldn't be bothered to even slow down before? (Annual carbon emissions aren't even trending downward, much less getting to net negative!)
So while I also foresee and lament humanity's self-genocide, it seems a bit hypocritical to get salty about AI "automation" while broadly accepting our industrial civilization's trajectory.
> Annual carbon emissions aren't even trending downward, much less getting to net negative!
They were trending downward in the US. AI usage in the US did change that single-handedly. I understand carbon emissions are a global problem but since they are subject to political remedies, the solution to the global problem is solving the same problem within each political jurisdiction.