In a YouTube video, a voice in English announces that China has researched and developed its own ultra-thin 1-nanometer chip – a staggering claim given that the chip isn’t expected in commercial devices for another decade.

“Recent news from China has sent ripples of excitement and astonishment across the globe,” gushes the voice-over on the China Charged YouTube channel. “This revolutionary breakthrough is more than a technological marvel; it is a game-changer that will redefine the global tech landscape.”

“Prepare to have your mind blown,” says another video, this time on the channel Unbelievable Projects. “Welcome to today’s video, in which we’ll discover why America remains behind China in infrastructure development.”

These voices and their “good news” about China are evidence that the Chinese Communist Party and its overseas proxies are using artificial intelligence to flood YouTube with propaganda videos, according to a new report that describes a “coordinated inauthentic influence campaign” on the platform.

  • deft@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    11 months ago

    It literally isn’t misinformation though? EVs are still polluting. There is no world with cars and buildings without pollution my guy especially now where we are at with technology.

    Nothing has been debunked?

    • helenslunch@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      It literally isn’t misinformation though?

      It literally is…

      EVs are still polluting

      No one thinks they’re not polluting. Everything you consume is polluting. But EVs pollute significantly less than their dino-fuel-powered counterparts, that’s the point you’re missing.

      • Sanyanov@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        This debate is clearly one of different goalposts.

        Electric car fans will fairly notice that electric cars are less bad than traditional ICE cars, and therefore the technology is good

        Anti-car folks will also rightfully point out that there’s too much focus on EVs at the time when we should move away from cars altogether, and that electric car future is also very unsustainable, just a little bit less, while giving the false impression of something “green”

        • helenslunch@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          I agree but it’s not a “false impression”. They ARE green. Just because they’re not the most environmentally friendly thing on the planet doesn’t mean they’re not green.

          I’d be elated if we all moved away from cars but that’s simply not realistic anytime in the near future.

          • Sanyanov@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            We should certainly establish the same definition of “green”, as it is so wide it encompasses both of our positions.

            I claim that most people expect EVs to be the solution for eco-friendly transportation that is sustainable and future-proof. And this is not true. That’s what I meant.

            It’s important to clear out why it is unrealistic in order to address it. I see two reasons: 1.Governments not doing enough to promote and build effective public transit 2.People not willing to lose comfort of driving their own car - something that insulates them from other people and allows to move anywhere anytime.

            And both are solvable through policy changes. First, we desperately need to invest in public transit. We can get money by taxing car sales more, which will shift both sides of the equation by making cars less affordable, while at the same time freeing up money for public transit development (of course, less sales of cars should be factored in). We need more routes, more comfortable conditions for passengers, more relatively low-scale options to drive passengers to less popular destinations. We also need to subsidize taxi and car rentals for cases when someone actually needs a car.

            But those are the solutions that might get negative reaction of the public at first, and this tension is to me the most problematic (of course after lobbying made by automakers). Populist leaders will never go for that step, or they risk losing their popularity and influence.

      • deft@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        11 months ago

        Lmfao no I get the point you literally named what I’m saying and gloss over it and this is why this situation we are under is inevitable

    • sheogorath@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      For the energy source aspect, it’s much more efficient to have a single big place to generate electricity compared to having millions of portable combustion engines running around inside cars. It’s also easier to switch to a cleaner energy if a wind farm or a solar power plant if you’re a state or some entity that’s responsible for energy generation in your region.

      TBH my biggest pet peeve on an EV is basically every EV is a privacy sucking machine. They record everything and send everything home. Give me a car like my old car that doesn’t have any telemetry and the technology is simple enough I can even push start the car when the alternator is fully dead.