Is he wrong about AI water usage, though? Using the fact that he defended AI water usage, as a reason to ignore everything he says, only works if he was wrong to defend AI water usage.
I read that article in depth and checked all the math and the extensive sources and found it very much accurate and it convinced me that the water usage issue is not serious.
I read that article in depth and checked all the math and the extensive sources and found it very much accurate and it convinced me that the water usage issue is not serious.